SHRI RAJUBHAI MAGANBHAI BHEEL Vs. STATE OF GUAJRAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel Mr. R.D. Makwana appears for the appellant, by way of legal aid, and the appellant is kept personally present in the Court. It was submitted, on instructions of the appellant, that the appellant having already undergone more than six years of imprisonment and even otherwise the appeal was sought to be pressed only for reduction of sentence in view of special facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) The appellant is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentenced to overall ten years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 500/ for three offences, in terms of the impugned judgment and order dated 18.1.2006 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patan, in Sessions Case No. 551 of 2002. The incident of assault by the appellant had taken place on 26.7.1996 at 12:30 in the night, wherein the victim was injured by the appellant out of a petty quarrel over playing cards in a public place among several residents of the same area. According to the medical certificate at Exh.31, following injuries were found on the body of the victim.

(3.) It was submitted by learned counsel, Mr. Makwana, that the victim was required to take treatment for 18 days for the above injuries, as against which the appellant was undergoing rigorous imprisonment since last six years and no untoward incident has been reported against the appellant during the period while he was on bail or thereafter when he was released on temporary bail pending appeal or on furlough leave. Learned APP fairly conceded, on the basis of the jail report, that it was true that no adverse remark was found in the jail record against the appellant and he had regularly returned to jail in time, whenever he was released on temporary bail or furlough. It was further submitted and conceded by learned APP that the appellant was reported to have no criminal antecedent and he appears to be regretful for the incident in which the victim of the offence was seriously injured. It was also submitted that the case of the prosecution could not clearly establish an intention to kill the victim on the part of the appellant and the incident appears to have arisen out of sudden rage or quarrel on a petty matter of sitting or playing cards in the public place. Learned counsel, Mr.Makwana, also submitted that real punishment was actually suffered by two young children of the appellant, who had already lost their mother, and therefore, a lenient view was required to be taken in the peculiar facts of the case.