GUPTESHWAR CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INCE , two cases giving rise to aforesaid two appeals, have arisen out of the same transaction, it were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution, which has given rise to Cr. Appeal No. 755 of 2010 that while the informant was at his door alongwith his two brothers, Ashok Choudhary and Surendra Choudhary came over there and started hurling abuses on them. Meanwhile the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 755/2010 came variously armed and they also started abusing them. When it was protedted, appellant no. 1 Gupteshwar Choudhary gave a Garasa blow on the head of Ramchandra Choudhary whereas appellant no. 5 Kamlesh Choudhary and appellant no. 2 Binde Choudhary assaulted Ramchandra Choudhary with Barcha and Lathi as a result of which Ramchandra Choudhary sustained five injuries, whereas Ramjanam Choudhary sustained three injuries. Thereupon, Niranjan Choudhary lodged a case, which was registered as Hussainabad P. S. Case No. 40/2006, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 307, 447, 504 of the Indian Penal Code. In that course, appellant Binde Choudhary and Shailesh Choudhary had also sustained injuries and, therefore, Binde Choudhary lodged a counter case, which was registered as Hussainabad P.S. Case No. 41/2006, under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that while Ashok Choudhary and Surendra Choudhary were quarreling in inebriated condition. Gupteshwar Choudhary went over there to pacify them, all the appellants of Cr,. Appeal No. 895/2010 came over there and started abusing him. When he (informant) alongwith his brother Sailesh reached there they were assaulted by them as a result of which all the three persons sustained injuries. Both the trials were taken up by the same court. The prosecution adduced witnesses in both the cases. After closure of the prosecution cases, statements of the accused persons of both the cases, were recorded and then the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 755/2010, were convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 148 IPC vide judgment dated 20th August 2010. All of them were sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years for the offence under Section 307/149 IPC, whereas no separate sentence was awarded for an offence under Section 148 IPC. Similarly, all those five appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 895 of 2010, on being convicted for an offence under Section 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code were sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months vide judgment dated 20th August, 2010.

(3.) MR . N.K.Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 755 of 2010, submits that Ramchandra Choudhary is said to have been inflicted with five injuries, whereas Ramjanam Choudhary has been alleged to have been inflicted with three injuries but none of the injuries sustained by them has been found to be dangerous to life and, thereby, the Court below has committed illegality in convicting the appellants for an offence under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. It was further pointed out that while these two appeals were pending for hearing, good sense prevailed upon the parties and they have entered into a compromise and a joint compromise petition has been filed in both the cases and, therefore, the joint compromise petition be considered in the light of the judgment rendered in a case of " Ishwar Singh versus State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2008) 15 SCC 667", wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in stead of allowing the offence which was non compoundable to be compounded, gave due consideration of it in imposing substantive sentence.