RAMESH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 1/10/1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla whereby appeal of the accused/petitioners (hereafter referred to as the accused persons No. 1 to 4 as per the seriatum in the cause title) against the judgment dated 29/10/1998 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohru has been partly allowed and partly dismissed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution against the accused persons is that on 4/10/1994 Han Nand (PW-l) had gone to Village Galu where he saw A-1 his nephew gambling. PW-1 rebuked A-1 and asked him to shun the company of the gamblers. On 9/11/1994 when PW-1 was returning home from the forest after answering the call of nature A-1 accompanied by A-2 to A-4 encountered him near the village temple, caught hold of him and gave him beatings. He was thrown on the ground and was given-fist and kick blows resulting in causing several injuries, including fracture of nasal bone. PW-1 reported the matter to the:police on the basis of which FIR Ext, PW-1/A was registered at police station, Jubbal. PW-1 was got medically examined and MLC regarding such examination is Ext. PW-8/A. On production by PW-1 blood stained sweater and Dhatu: Exts. P-1 and P-2 were taken in possession vide Memo Ext, PW-1/B. After collecting the material and on being satisfied of the involvement of the accused persons in the commission of the offences a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons who came to be tried by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (1), Rohru on a charge under Sections 451/34, 325/34, 323/34, 441/34 and 506/34, IPC. To prove the charge against the accused, prosecution examined 10 witnesses. The accused in their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case and claimed to be innocent. On the basis of the evidence on record, the learned trial Magistrate found the accused persons guilty of the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 325 IPC and accordingly convicted them and sentenced each of the accused to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court andtto pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months.

(3.) Being aggrieved, the accused persons preferred an appeal against their conviction and sentence which was partly allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla to the extent that the conviction of A-1, A-3 and A-4 Under Section 325 IPC was set aside but was maintained under Section 323 IPC and they were sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and fine of Rs. 500 each and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for one month. The conviction of and sentence awarded to A-2 by the trial Court, however, was maintained. Aggrieved accused persons have preferred the present revision petition against such conviction and sentences awarded to them.,