- (1.) The present Revision Application is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.06.2006 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patan dismissing the Appeal of the applicant-accused, in turn confirming judgment and order dated 13.04.2005 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Siddhpur in Criminal Case No. 1022 of 1998.
(2.) Learned Judicial Magistrate convicted the applicant-accused for the offence under Section 452 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.05,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. Applicant came to be convicted also for the offence under Section 323, IPC, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.01,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 15 days' simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently with benefit of set off for the period undergone as under trial prisoner. The applicant was also tried for the offences under Section 504, 506(2), IPC, for which offences he came to be acquitted. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence came to be upheld by the appellate court below.
(3.) The prosecution case, briefly stated and as revealed from the complaint dated 14.07.1998 filed by one Indumatiben Hariprasad Shukla was inter alia that on 14.07.1998 in the hours of evening between 6 p.m. to 6.30 p.m., the applicant-accused trespassed the house of the complainant situated in the Parekh's Madh, Brahm Street, Siddhpur, that the accused carried pipe with him and used abusive language. When the complainant told that he should not speak filthy as there was a lady member in the house, the accused got enraged and gave blows on the thigh part of the left leg of the complainant and injured her. The accused threatened to kill and went away. A complaint was registered as Crime Register No.137 of 1998, with the Siddhpur Police Station for the offences under Section 452, 323, 504, 506(2), IPC. The chargesheet was submitted by the police and Criminal Case was registered. The applicant-accused did not admit the guilt and subjected to trial. The aforesaid Criminal Case No.1022 of 1998 culminated into the order of conviction and sentence as above. 3.1 In respect of the very incident, the present applicant also filed F.I.R. being Crime Register No.138 of 1998. Therein seven accused were named, who were- (i) younger brother of Bhatt Kamlesh whose name was not known to the complainant, (ii) Pandya Rameshkumar Shivprasad, (iii) Dave Babulal Manilal, (iv) Jani Vinubhai Bhanuprasad, (v) Raval Nareshkumar Krishnalal, (vi) Vyas Balkrishna Niranjanlal and (vii) Vyas Kamlesh Niranjanlal, all residents of Siddhpur. It was stated in the complaint that the complainant had been staying with his 70 years old mother, 12 years son, widowed sister and that his wife had died; on the date of incident when he reached back to his house at around 7 p.m. in the evening, his sister told her that Indumatiben Hariprasad Shukla and his daughter-in-law Pragnaben Rajendrakumar Shukla, staying in the neighbourhood opposite their house, had taunted her saying that she wanted to marry her brother. After that, around 7 p.m. accused persons came to his house and shouted asking her to come out of the house. The accused persons carried with them weapons like knife, sticks, hockey sticks, 3.2 The complainant-the present applicant further stated that he came out from his house; and accused No.7 gave blow of hockey stick on his head, accused No.6 tried to give blow by knife and that the complainant suffered injury on the thumb and on the arm of his hand when he tried to prevent him. It was stated that accused No.2 pushed him, as a result of which he fell down. Other accused gave stick blows as a result of which injuries were suffered on the left shoulder. It was further stated that complainant's sister and nephew intervened and took him inside the house, but the accused persons continued to use abusive and threatening language. The complainant took medical treatment and thereafter the complaint was filed. 3.3 Thus there was a cross-complaint filed by the applicant herein in respect of the very incident, in which specific role was attributed and use of particular weapon was mentioned in respect of each of accused persons named therein. The offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 324, 504 and 506(2), IPC, were registered against the said seven accused. It is relevant to note that accused No.2-Pandya Rameshkumar, accused No.3-Dave Babulal Manilal, and accused No.5-Raval Nareshkumar Krishnalal were the witnesses in the case filed against the present applicant which led to his conviction and sentence as per the impugned judgment. 3.4 In the Criminal Case No. 1022 of 1998 against the applicant, the prosecution in order to prove its case, examined several witnesses, whom included Dave Babulal Manilal (PW 2, Exh.27) and Raval Nareshkumar (PW 7, Exh.35), who were accused Nos.3 and 5 respectively in the cross case; the complainantIndumatiben Hariprasad Shukla (PW-1, Exh.24), Pragnaben (PW-10, Exh.40), Jayshreeben (Exh.31), Amrutlal I. Shah (PW-5, Exh.33), Neetaben Shah (PW-6, Exh.34), Kaushal Pandya (PW-8, Exh.36), Tajmal Husain (PW-9, Exh.38). Dr. Atul Kumar, the Medical Officer was examined (PW-3, Exh.29). Investigating OfficerKeshavlal Devjibhai Chaudhari was examined (PW-11, Exh.43).;