SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellants herein being aggrieved of the judgment dated 19.1.1993 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar in Sessions Case No. 50/92, whereby they were convicted and sentenced as below:-- Offence Sentences Fine Fine Default sentences Section 304 Part II I.P.C. read with 4 Years ' R.I. Rs. 100/- 2 Months' additional S.I. Section 34 I.P.C.
(2.) Shri H.S.S. Kharlia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Digvijay Singh representing the appellants vehemently and fervently contended that the conviction of the appellants as recorded by the Trial Court for the offence under Section 304 Part II I.P.C. is absolutely unjustified. He drew the Court's attention to the findings recorded by the Trial Court in the impugned judgment where, it has been conclusively held that the deceased Bhajanlal trespassed into the house of the appellants with the intention of indulging in some vile act with Rampyari and at that point of time, acting under grave and sudden provocation, the accused persons beat him up. He submits that as per the evidence of medical expert Dr. Charanjeet Singh (PW.3), a total of 52 injuries were noticed on the body of the deceased Bhajanlal but apart from four fractures on non-vital parts of the body, all the other injuries were simple superficial in nature. Thus, as per Shri Kharlia, the conviction of the appellants deserve to be altered to one under Section 335 or 325 I.P.C. He urges that three of the five convicted accused were extended the benefit of probation. The accused appellants have remained in custody for a period well in excess of two years and thus, the ends of justice would be subserved by reducing the sentence awarded to the appellants by the Trial Court to the period already undergone by them. With these submissions, Shri Kharlia, learned Senior Counsel prayed for acceptance of the appeal by toning down the offence alleged against the accused and reducing the sentence awarded to them.
(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the appellants. Nonetheless, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that the Trial Court, after thorough appreciation of the evidence available on record, came to a concrete conclusion that the deceased Bhajanlal trespassed into the house of the accused intending to indulge in some immoral act with Rampyari W/o Shri Krishan. He had made 2-3 previous attempts of similar nature for which Panchayats had been convened and the deceased and his brothers had sought atonement. On the day of occurrence, Bhajanlal after consuming liquor entered into the house of the accused whereupon, Rampyari who was washing utensils raised a hue and cry. Being enraged, the accused-appellants and the co-convict, thrashed Bhajanlal with the intention of teaching him a lesson. The findings so recorded by the Trial Court at para Nos. 56, 57, 58 and 59 of the impugned judgment are reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference:-- ...[Varnacular Text Omitted]... ;