BHURIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under s. 482 Cr P. C. , the accused petitioner Bhuria has challenged the order of this Court dated May 23, 1989 passed in S. B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 46 of 1981 whereby the conviction of the accused-petitioner Bhuria for the offence under s. 326 IPC was maintained.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly stated are that a complaint was filed at PS. Sadri on 18. 3. 1974 at about 11. 30 PM by one Pokar against 13 persons. ' THE police, after investigation, challaned the case against three of them but the Court took cognizance against all the 13 persons. However, after trial, the persons against whom the cognizance was taken by the court were acquitted but the three persons petitioner and two other persons) against whom challan was filed by the Police were held guilty. On appeal, the conviction of other two persons was set aside but the conviction of accused-petitioner Bhuria for the offence under S. 326 IPC was maintained and his sentence of four years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 1000/- was reduced to one year's rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 500/ -. This was a case where the accused amputated the hand of the complainant from near his wrist joint on account of long standing enmity. Actually, it is alleged that complainant Pokar tried to commit rape with the wife of accused Khetia. A case was challaned against him but after trial, he was acquitted and, therefore, in order to teach a lesson to com-plainant Pokar, the accused-persons have availed him when Pokar was going to his house after working in the field. He was attacked ' in the way. It is alleged from the side of the accused that initially, Pokar caught hold of the neck of Khetia and when he tried to strangulate his neck, accused Bhuria snatched his axe from him and inflicted this injury. This story has been totally disbelieved by the learned lower courts According to the learned lower courts, if there were three persons, Pokar could not have attacked them. Moreover, it was accused party which was having a grouse against him because he was acquitted of the offence of attempt to commit rape with the wife of accused Khetia. Rather, it was found by the learned lower courts that it was a pre-meditated attack THE scope of s. 482 Cr. P. C. is very limited. Unless grave and substantial injustice has been caused, the impugned order cannot be interfered by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary powers under s. 482 Cr. P. C.