BADRU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FT) No.1, Banswara dated 28.1.2005, whereby he acquitted the accused appellant for the offence under Sec. 504 Penal Code but convicted him for the offence under Sections 447 and 304 part II Penal Code and sentenced him to three months' R.I. and five years' R.I. together with a fine of Rs.2500.00 and in default, to further undergo one month's R.I. respectively. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The charge against the accused was that on 25.10.2004, in the evening, the accused appellant committed house trespass in order to commit crime in the house of Bhima situated at Mauja Dungra, Gram Panchayat Khajuri and while abusing and uttering filthy language to him, inflicted stone and lathi blow on the wife of Bhima viz; Meta with the knowledge of committing culpable homicide, not amounting to murder. The report of the incident was lodged by Bhima and his wife at the Police Station, Danpur, District Banswara on 26.10.2004, upon which the police registered a case under sections 447, 323 and 504 IPC. Smt.Meta was medically examined. Her x-ray was also taken. Thereafter, the police commenced investigation. Smt.Meta died on 3.11.2004 and her post mortem was conducted.The cause of death was shown to be head injury. Thereafter, accused Badru was challaned under ss.447, 504 and 304 part II IPC. After committal of the case, the accused was charged accordingly, to which he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses. The statement of the accused under Sec.313 Cr.PC was recorded. He led no evidence in his defence. After hearing the arguments, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused for the offence u/s 504 Penal Code but convicted him under ss.447 & 304 part II Penal Code as above.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant does not want to argue this appeal on merits. He simply states that the accused is in jail since 1.11.2004 i.e. around more than three and half years. He is a tribal labourer and nobody is there to look after his family and, therefore, he may be sentenced to the period already undergone. Keeping in view the facts & circumstances of the case and especially no intention to cause death of Smt.Meta, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant appears to be just and reasonable, to which the learned Public Prosecutor has not seriously opposed.