- (1.) The instant appeal filed on behalf of the accused appellants, is directed against the judgment and orders dated 11th November, 2013 passed by Sri B.P.Saxena, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Kaushambi in Sessions Trial No.50 of 2006 (State Vs. Ram Dhani and three others), whereby the appellants were convicted under sections 304, 452, 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of ten years, rigorous imprisonment of one year and rigorous imprisonment of six months respectively and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, failing which to further undergo simple imprisonment of one year. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.
(3.) On behalf of the appellants, it has been submitted that the impugned judgment and orders are against the weight of material and law. To elaborate this, very briefly it has been argued that the incident is of night, there was no source of light, FIR was lodged with delay, this shows that none saw the occurrence and subsequently after deliberation due to enmity, the appellants were falsely implicated. The other ground which has been urged is that from the facts established by ocular and medical evidence, no case under section 304 IPC is made out. At the most, it was a case of voluntarily causing grievous hurt, punishable under section 325 IPC. In support of the last argument, learned counsel for the appellants has referred the following cases:- (1) Parusuraman and others Vs. The State of Tamilnadu, 1991 28 AllCriC 604 Reliance has been placed on the observation made by the Hon'ble Apex Court whereby taking into consideration nature of the injuries and facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble Apex Court altered the conviction in that case from Section 304(1) IPC to Section 325 IPC. (2) G.S.Walia vs. State of Punjab & others, 1998 JIC 811:- In this case, reliance has been placed on paras 6 and 11 of the report. In that case, injured Balwant Singh sustained 13 injuries, three of them were grievous in nature and their seats were head and legs of the injured but according to medical opinion, death had occurred on account of Pulmonary Embolism. Hon'ble Apex Court held that complication was direct consequence and injuries were remote, therefore, conviction under section 302/149 IPC was altered under section 325/149 IPC. (3) Prayag Singh & others Vs. State of U.P., 2004 2 JIC 1029 - On behalf of the appellants, reliance has been placed on paras 22 to 24. In this case, after sustaining injuries Girwar, the injured, had died. During medical examination, it was found that though no apparent damage was caused to head and neck region but veins and arteries of the deceased were very narrow and some blood had clotted there which resulted in his death. In this case, conviction under section 304 IPC was altered to section 325 IPC.;