Allahabad High Court
Kallu vs The State Of U.P. on 10 February, 2025
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8409
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1073 of 2001
Appellant :- Kallu
Respondent :- The State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- R.N.S.Chauhan,Devendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 03.10.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sitapur by which appellant was convicted and sentenced involved in Case Crime No. 73 of 1994 and S.T. No. 240 of 1995, under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. for a period of one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- in case of default of payment to undergo three months additional imprisonment and under Section 323/34 for a period of six months imprisonment and under Section 504 I.P.C. for a period of six months rigorous imprisonment and Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Sadarpur, District Sitapur.
Facts in brief are that on 21.04.1994 at about 10 A.M. the appellant and co-accused Lalji came to his house and asked for air pump. The informant told them that there was no washer in the pump. On this the accused persons became enraged and went there equipped with lathi and started beating with abuse relating to the caste of the informant. His daughter Phoolmati came for his rescue but she was also beaten. Thereafter on arrival of Babu and Shratughan the accused persons ran away while threatening the informant. Regarding this incident F.I.R. was lodged at the police station on the same day and injured persons were sent for medical examination. They were medically examined and injury reports were prepared. After investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant and other co-accused Lalji under Sections 323, 324, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act.
The court concerned took cognizance of the offences and after compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. case was committed for trial.
The court concerned framed the charge against the appellant with other co-accused persons under Section 323, 324 read with Section 34 and 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act which were read over and explained to the accused persons but they denied and claimed for trial.
Prosecution examined P.W. 1, the informant Sri Ram; P.W. 2, Smt Phoolmati, the injured; P.W. 3, Dr. Krishna Kumar; P.W. 4, S.I. Arvind Kumar Verma.
After conclusion of prosecution evidence statements of appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the prosecution version and did not adduce any evidence in defence.
After hearing the arguments for the prosecution as well as the defence, the impugned judgment and order was passed by the learned trial court in which the appellants were convicted and sentenced under Sections 323, 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C., section 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment and order present appeal has been preferred.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the injured persons sustained simple injuries on their person those were not fatal to the life. No any specific role for causing injury to the injured was assigned to the present appellant except general role with other co-accused. There was no any intention or knowledge with the appellant to cause injury to other injured persons.
Further submitted that the incident took place in the year 1994 and till now 30 years have elapsed. The appellant was young at the time of alleged incident and now he is more than sixty years, therefore, no purpose will be served by sending him to jail. There is no any subsequent conduct of the appellant that he had committed similar offence, therefore, request to reduce the sentence as undergone and award compensation to be given to the injured persons since no purpose will be served by sending the appellant in jail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.
In the case of Ramesh Vs. State of U.P. AIR 1992 S.C. 664 where a single injury was found in the back of the neck of injured, appellant who was tried alongwith two others under Section 307/34 IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years while two other were acquitted, appeal was partly allowed by Hon'ble the Apex Court. His conviction was altered into Section 324 IPC and sentence was reduced to the period already undergone with fine of Rs. 3000/- which was to be paid to the complainant as compensation.
In the case of Merambhai Punjabhai Khachar & Ors vs. State Of Gujarat, 1996 AIR 3236, there was an attempt to commit murder with fire arm and injury was by a pellet that struck the head, Hon'ble the Apex Court held that Section 307 IPC cannot be held to have been satisfied and conviction was altered to Section 324 IPC.
In the case of Neelam Bahal and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand 2010 (2) SCC 229 where conviction and sentence of appellant under Section 307 IPC was converted into Section 326 IPC simplicitor. Incident took place in the year 1987 and appellant was about 25 years old. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble the Apex Court, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by him.
On considering the facts and submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, it appears that all the injuries on the person of injured were simple in nature. The weapon used in causing those injuries was said to be lathi. No any injury was fatal to the life of the injured. 30 years have elapsed from the date of incident till now and at that time appellant was young but now he is aged more than sixty. By sending the appellant to jail no better purpose will be served though awarding compensation in its place may be adequate redressal.
To sum up the totality of case, in view of the aforesaid observation made by the Apex Court, this Court is of the view that no purpose will be served by sending the appellant to jail but it will be adequate to reduce the sentence as undergone by him and to impose compensation for Rs. 10,000/- that will be paid either to the injured persons or their survivors.
Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded against the appellant, (Kallu) is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone by him and he is to deposit Rs. 10,000/- before the concerned court within a period of 45 days from today which shall be paid either to the injured or their survivors.
Trial court record be sent back to the concerned court for compliance.
Order Date :- 10.2.2025// Suraj Srivastav
