Sunil Kumar Garg, J. - (1.) The above-named accused appellant has preferred this jail appeal against the judgment and order dated 22.4.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi by which he acquitted the accused appellant of the charge under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SC/ST Act), but convicted him under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months R.l.
(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are as follows:- On 17.4.1994 at about 9.35 PM, PW 15 Padma Ram gave a Parcha-bayan Ex. P/12 to PW 17 Bhanwar Singh, SHO, Pindwara stating that at about 8.30 PM on 17.4.1994 he, PW 16 Ganesh and PW 13 Maknaram reached at the Bus Stand, Jhadoli, where Tempo RJ 27/2313 dashed against the cycle of PW 16 Ganesh. It was further stated by him that after this accident, PW 15 Padma Ram, PW 13 Maknaram and PW 16 Ganesh caught hold of the driver of that Tempo and when the driver of that Tempo cried, accused appellant came there and he gave knife blows on the scapular region and one left side of the stomach of PW 15 Padma Ram with an intention to kill him and he also caused injuries to PW 16 Ganesh by the same knife. Had PW 13 Maknaram not intervened in the matter, accused appellant would have killed both of them. On this Parcha-bayan Ex. P/12, PW 17 Bhanwar Singh registered regular FIR No. 71/94 Ex. P/20 and started investigation. PW 15 Padma Ram was got medically examined by PW 8 Dr. R. Loonkar and his injury report is Ex. P/11. Similarly, PW 16 Ganesh was also got medically examined by the same doctor and his injury report is Ex. P/13 and X-ray reports of both of them are Ex. P/7 and Ex. P/8 respectively. After usual investigation the police submitted a challan against the accused appellant for committing offence under Section 307 IPC and 3(2) (v) of the SC/ST Act. Thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 28.11.1997 framed charges under Section 307 IPC and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act against the accused appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses and got exhibited 20 documents. Thereafter, statement of accused appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded No defence evidence was led. After recording evidence and conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge vide his judgment and order dated 22.4.1999 acquitted the accused appellant of the charge under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, but convicted him under Section 307 IPC and sentenced in the manner as stated above, holding inter-alia that accused appellant attempted to commit culpable homicide amounting to murder punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. by causing injuries to PW 15 Padma Ram and PW 16 Ganesh by Knife. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 22.4.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, the accused appellant has preferred this jail appeal.
(3.) In this appeal, this Court vide order dated 21.12.1999 appointed Shri S. Rathore as Amicus Curiae, who has argued on behalf of the accused appellant. His main arguments are:- 1. That in the present case, murderous intent is missing and whole incident took place on the spur of moment and there is no intention on the part of the accused appellant to commit murder of both PW 15 Padma Ram and PW 16 Ganesh and thus, conviction of the accused appellant under Section 307 IPC is wrong and should be set aside. 2. That if the Court comes to the conclusion that accused appellant has committed the offence under Section 307 IPC, lenient view be taken in awarding sentence.;