PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL,J. - (1.) The accused-appellant has filed this appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.08.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sikar in Sessions Case No.5/2001 whereby the learned trial Court after holding the appellant guilty for offence under Section 307 I.P.C. sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof to further undergo imprisonment for three months and for offence under Section 325 I.P.C. sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default thereof to further suffer imprisonment for one month. It was also ordered that both the substantive sentences would run concurrently.
(2.) Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that FIR No.91/2000 came to be registered for offence under Section 307 I.P.C. against the appellant at Police Station Ranoli (District Sikar) on 16.6.2000 at the instance of complainant-Shri Salagram in which it was alleged that appellant caused injuries to injured-Shri Mohan Lal Choudhary on 15.6.2000 at about 11.00 in the night by running a tractor over him. After usual investigation charge-sheet was filed against the appellant for offences under Sections 307 and 325 I.P.C. and in order to prove the charges prosecution produced oral as well as documentary evidence whereas appellant in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the evidence produced on behalf of the prosecution and specifically stated that he has falsely been implicated in the case. In defence oral as well as documentary evidence was produced. Learned trial Court after considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the evidence made available on record convicted and sentenced the appellant as already stated. It is to be noted that during pendency of this appeal the appellant and injured-Shri Mohan Lal entered into compromise and in this regard an application under Section 320 Cr.P.C. has been filed on 11.4.2017 whereby it was jointly prayed by them that the appeal may be decided in the light of compromise entered between them. Both of them also filed their affidavit.
(3.) It was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that from the evidence available on record including the nature of injuries sustained by the injured-Shri Mohanlal in the alleged incident it cannot be said that offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out but learned trial Court did not consider this aspect of the matter in a right perspective. It was further submitted that as per the injury report injured-Shri Mohanlal sustained fracture of tibia fibula bones of his both the legs but merely by that reason it cannot be inferred that appellant was having intention or knowledge that by running over the injured by a tractor death is likely to be caused of injured and in absence of such intention or knowledge offence under Section 307 I.P.C. cannot be said to be made out. It was submitted that at the most offence under Section 325 I.P.C. can be said to be made out against the appellant for which he has already been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court and in view of the compromise entered into between the parties the appellant is entitled to be acquitted for this offence also.;