DEVA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but on completion of the trial, they were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of '10,000/- each under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Since the offence under Section 323 I.P.C. is covered by the major offence, no separate sentence was passed. As the convicts herein to be referred as accused persons hereinafter are from the same family felt aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, as such, filed the present appeal.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case germane to this appeal can be stated thus. PW3 Faquir Chand was a Baildar . On 28th June, 1998 at about 7.30 p.m., while returning to his home, he noticed that his cow had entered into the barren field of the accused persons. From there, his daughter goaded the cow to home. Accused Deva Kumari started abusing her for causing damage to her field. On this, complainant told her to assess the damage, so caused and refrain from abusing her. Despite this, she did not stop. In the meantime, her son accused Kuldip Singh approached him and caught hold from his shirt-collar and threw on the ground. Tilak Raj accused another son, dealt a blow with the danda on his back side on the shoulder, while he was lying on the ground. Accused Deva Kumari brought an axe and hit on his head from its blunt side. On getting this bleeding injury, he got unconscious. His clothes were also smeared with blood.

(3.) Prosecution examined its witnesses to prove the charges and the accused were also examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Their case was denial simplictor, however, they stated that they were innocent and that this case was planted against them. They took up the stand that the complainant and his son attacked and assaulted them at 9 p.m. in their house on the day of alleged occurrence and gave merciless beatings, because of the enmity and to that effect a criminal case was lodged and is pending against them in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Dehra and this case was a counter blast. The learned trial Court called upon to enter into their defence, but no evidence in defence was led by them. At the end of trial, they were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.