The High Court
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal No. 271 of 2017 ----- (Against the judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2016 and order of sentence dated 25.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 141 of 2013 arising out of G.R. Case No. 190 of 2013 corresponding to Kersai P.S. Case No. 11 of 2013 by the Court of Sri Ram Babu Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega) Ratiya Bhoy @ Ratia Bhoy --- --- Appellant The State of Jharkhand Versus ….... --- --- Respondent For the Appellant : Mr. Rishi Pallav, Advocate : Mr. Someshway Roy, A.P.P. For the State PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR J U D G M E N T 21.02.2024 This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2016 and order of sentence dated 25.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 141 of 2013 arising out of G.R. Case No. 190 of 2013 corresponding to Kersai P.S. Case No. 11 of 2013 by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega whereby and where under the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 341, 323 and 307 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for 1 month u/s 341 IPC; R.I. for 1 year u/s 323 IPC and R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs.5000/- and a default stipulation of S.I. for 1 month u/s 307 IPC with further direction that 60% of the fine deposited shall go to the informant namely Ram Briksha Bhoy (P.W.1). 2. The prosecution story, arose in the wake of the fardbeyan of the informant –Ram Briksha Bhoy (P.W.1) given before the Officer-In-Charge of Kersai Police Station on 01.05.2013 at 10.30 hrs, is as under: On 30.04.2013 at about 8.00 o’clock evening the informant along with his co-villager namely Naneshwar Manjhi was distributing the invitation card for function of Chhatthi of son of said Naneshwar Manjhi and in that course when he reached near the house of the accused then the said accused without saying anything started assaulting indiscriminately with Iron rod on his head and he sustained grievous injury on his head and mouth and blood started flowing and he fell down and became 2 unconscious and on his alarm nearby people assembled there and brought him in injured condition in his house. He further alleged that the motive of the occurrence is prior dispute and he was fully confident that the accused assaulted his with iron rod on his head with intention to cause his death and on seeing him unconscious the accused fled away and after the sufficient time he regained his consciousness in the house and thereafter police arrived and recorded his fard beyan and after reading and finding the same to be true he put his signature over it. 3. On the basis of fardbeyan Kersai PS. Case No. 11 of 2013 dated 01.05.2013 U/s 341,323,325 and 307 of the IPC was registered and the investigation was taken up. 4. After the investigation in this case, charge sheet No. 12/13 dated 31.05.2013 u/s 341,323 and 307 of the IPC was submitted against the above named sole accused who was sent up for trial, on the basis of which cognizance was taken vide order dated 01.07.13 and he learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Simdega committed the case to the court of Sessions. 5. The above named sole accused was charged under three heads i.e., U/s 341,323 and 307 of the IPC and the charges so framed were read over and explained to the accused in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. The learned Court below after conducting the full-fledged trial Heard learned Legal Aid Counsel representing the appellant and the passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is under challenge. 7. learned A.P.P. for the State. Arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellants: 8. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the sole appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 341, 323 and 307 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for 1 month u/s 341 IPC; R.I. for 1 year u/s 323 IPC and R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs.5000/- and a default stipulation of S.I. for 1 month u/s 307 IPC. It has been pointed out on behalf of the appellant that pursuant to the previous order dated 22.01.2024 a notice was sent to the appellant, which has been duly received by the appellant but it is submitted that the said appellant is not in contact with him. Further, it has been submitted that the appellant has remained in jail including the pre-conviction and the post- conviction period for a period of 3 years 11 months and 6 days and as such, he has 3 remained for about 4 years in jail out of the maximum sentence of 5 years. Further, it is also pointed out that from the deposition of P.W. 5 – Dr. Suchitra Kumari, it is evident that all the injuries alleged to have been inflicted upon the injured informant Ram Briksha Bhoy-P.W.1 are simple in nature and injuries caused to him were not fatal for his life and thus it has been stated that no offence under Section 307 of the IPC has been
Legal Reasoning
substantiated. However, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since the appellant has already spent a period of about 4 years in jail, therefore, appellant is confining his argument only on the point of sentence and not on the merit of the judgment of conviction. Further, it is submitted that the incidence has taken place as far back in the year 2013 i.e., 10 years back and this appellant has been suffering the misery and harassment of the criminal prosecution for a period of 10 years. Further, it has also been pointed out that there is nothing on record to show any criminal history and over a period of time the appellant has attained middle age about 50 years and therefore, after upholding the judgment of conviction, the order of sentence may be modified to the extent that sentence of imprisonment for the period already undergone may be imposed and sentence of a suitable fine amount may be imposed in order to give it to the victim by way of compensation. Argument advanced on behalf of the State. 9. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant. He has submitted that the learned trial court below has rightly appreciated the evidences adduced on behalf of the prosecution and passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as above, particularly in view of the fact that there are 6 injuries alleged to have been inflicted upon the injured Ram Briksha Bhoy, who has been examined as P.W.1. Although, learned A.P.P. did not controvert the fact that the injuries were simple in nature and it has been opined by the doctor P.W.5 that the injuries sustained were not sufficient to cause death as they were not fatal. Further, it has been submitted that since the appellant does not want to argue the case on merit on the point of judgment of conviction, therefore, the judgment of conviction may be uphold. It is also submitted that as per the record, the appellant has remained in jail for 3 years 11 months and 6 days. 4 Appraisal & Findings 10. Having heard the parties, perused the record of the case including the LCR. 11. It is found that the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 341, 323 and 307 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for 1 month u/s 341 IPC; R.I. for 1 year u/s 323 IPC and R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs.5000/- and a default stipulation of S.I. for 1 month u/s 307 IPC with further direction that 60% of the fine deposited shall got the informant namely Ram Briksha Bhoy (P.W.1). 12. Since, the appellant does not want to argue this case on merit on the point of judgment of conviction, therefore, this Court upholds the judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 141 of 2013 arising out of G.R. Case No. 190 of 2013 corresponding to Kersai P.S. Case No. 11 of 2013 by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega. 13. So far as and order of sentence dated 25.11.2016 is concerned, it is found that all the injuries, which are said to have been inflicted upon the injured P.W.1 are simple in nature and they were not injurious for life. Further, is found that the incidence took place in the year 2013 and therefore, the appellant has suffered the trauma and misery of criminal prosecution for the last 10 years. Further, it is found from the record that appellant has remained in jail for about 3years 11 months and 6 days out of the maximum sentence of 5 years and the appellant has reached the middle age over a period of time and therefore, it is found that no useful purpose would be served if the appellant is again sent to jail to serve the remaining part of the sentence. Justice would be meted if the appellant is sentenced for the term of period already undergone by him and sentence of suitable amount of fine may be imposed in order to give it to the victim Ram Briksh Bhoy (P.W.1). 14. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 141 of 2013 arising out of G.R. Case No. 190 of 2013 corresponding to Kersai P.S. Case No. 11 of 2013 by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega is upheld and order of sentence dated 25.11.2016 is modified to the extent that he is sentenced for imprisonment for the term of period already undergone by him and a sentence of fine of Rs.5000/-( Rupees Five thousand only) collectively is imposed upon him under all the heads/ count to be given to the victim 5 P.W.1 ( Ram Briksha Bhoy) by way of compensation. 15. Since the appellant is on bail and therefore, a time of four months is given to the appellant to pay the aforesaid fine and in default of payment of fine, he is directed to undergo S.I. for a period of 1 year. The appellant of the Nazarat through amount deposit may fine the the concerned Civil Court in order to give it to the victim P.W.-1 Informant (Ram Briksha Bhoy), by way of compensation. 16. The learned Trial Court is directed to ensure that the said fine amount is deposited within the stipulated period of time and if the same is not deposited by the appellant, then he will serve the sentence as awarded in case of default of payment of fine by taking all necessary measures as per the provisions of law . 17. The appellant has been allowed to deposit the said fine amount through the Nazarat of the concerned Civil Court and the moment appellant deposits the fine amount, he shall be released and discharged from the liabilities of bail bonds accordingly in this case. 18. The learned Court below is also directed that on deposit of the said fine amount by the appellant, a notice be sent to the victim P.W.-1 (Ram Briksh Bhoy) and on his appearance the said fine amount, if so deposited by the appellant, shall be disbursed to him. In case, the said victim is not traceable or not available or not found at the given address, or does not appear before the Court, the same shall be disbursed to the close or near relatives or kith and kin of the said victim or else, as the concerned learned Trial Court may deem fit and proper, and in this regard the Court concerned may also involve the Para Legal Volunteer (PLV) of District Legal services Authority (DLSA), Simdega, if required and the Secretary, D.L.S.A., Simdega is directed to co-operate in this regard. 19. This Criminal Appeal is dismissed with the modification in the order of sentence. 20. Let the Lower Court Records and a copy of the judgment be also transmitted to the learned Court below for its compliance in letter and spirit. A.Mohanty (Navneet Kumar, J.)