Telangana High Court

G.Venkateswar Reddy, Wanaparthy ... vs The State Of Telangana, Rep Pp., on 15 March, 2023

Bench: G.Anupama Chakravarthy

     HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

               CRIMINAL APPEAL No.507 of 2017

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated

25.04.2017 passed in S.C.No.286 of 2016 on the file of IX

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy, by which, the

accused/appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 323

of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period

of Six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of

payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a

period of one month.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri S.

Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the

State.

3. PW-1 has made a report to the Station House Officer,

Kothakota Police Station alleging that he was having land in the

outskirts of the village and that on 31.12.2015 at about 11.30 a.m.,

the accused high-handedly ploughed the said land. After coming to

know of it, PW-1 went to the land along with his junior paternal

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

uncle by name Madhusudhan Reddy and questioned the high-

handedness of the accused. But the accused/appellant, with an

intention to kill them, took a stick and beat them on their heads,

which caused bleeding injuries. The complaint/Ex.P-1 further

disclose that one Chukka Naganna and Boggu Chandraiah

witnessed the incident.

4. Basing on the report of PW-1, the Station House Officer of

Kothakota Police Station registered a case in Crime No.180 of

2015 against the accused for the offence under Section 307 of IPC

and after completion of investigation, filed a charge sheet.

5. On appearance of accused, the charge was framed for the

offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC, the Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Wanaparthy has committed the case to

the Court of Session. Later, the appellant was examined under

Section 228 of Cr.P.C. and a single charge was framed against him,

for the offence under Section 307 of IPC, for which, the appellant

pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

6. During the course of trial, on behalf of prosecution, PWs.1 to

11 were examined and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1.

Ex.D-1 was marked during the course of cross-examination of PW-

5. On completion of the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the

accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to

the incriminating evidence, which was denied by the accused.

7. The trial Court, after considering the entire oral and

documentary evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the

ingredients of Section 307 IPC are not at all attracted and therefore,

convicted the accused for the offence under Section 323 of IPC.

Challenging the said judgment of the trial Court, the present appeal

is filed.

8. It is the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that

the trial Court ought to have acquitted him, as no motive was

established and the prosecution has miserably failed to being home

the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under

Section 307 of IPC. The learned counsel for appellant has further

urged that even the ingredients of Section 323 of IPC are not

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

attracted in the present case, and therefore, prayed to allow the

appeal by setting aside the judgment of the trial Court.

9. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor contended

that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the

offence under Section 323 of IPC, as the appellant/caused bleeding

injuries to PWs.1 and 2, therefore, he prayed to confirm the

judgment of the trial Court.

10. On perusal of the evidence on record, it is evident that PW-1

gave report/Ex.P-1 to the Police contending that the accused has

high-handedly ploughed the field and when confronted, PWs.1 and

2 were attacked by the appellant/accused. PW-3 is one Chukka

Naganna and PW-5 is one Boggu Chandraiah, who were said to be

the eye witnesses to the incident and their evidence disclose that on

the date of incident at 11.30 a.m., when they are working in their

fields, they could observe some altercation between the accused

and PWs.1 and 2. On that, they went to the fields of PW-1 and

separated accused and PWs.1 and 2 and that they observed

bleeding injuries on the heads of PWs.1 and 2. It is the specific

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

evidence of PW-5 that he tied a cloth on the head of PW-1 in order

to prevent further oozing of blood. The evidence of PW-4 disclose

that a panchayat took place between the accused on one hand and

PWs.1 and 2 on the other hand in the presence of village elders,

wherein, it was decided that accused and PWs.1 and 2 shall

cultivate the land in alternative years.

11. On perusal of the evidence of PWs.4 and 6, it is evident that

there is dispute between accused and PWs.1 and 2 with regard to

the land and the elders of the panchayath have passed a resolution

that the cultivation shall be made by the accused on one hand and

PWs.1 and 2 on the other hand in alternative years.

12. The other witnesses in this case are PWs.7 and 8, who are

the panch witnesses for the scene of offence and also for recovery

of M.O.1/stick from the possession of accused in his house. PW.9

is the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kothakota Police Station, who has

registered the case basing on the report of PW-1 i.e. Ex.P-1 and

further investigated the case.

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

13. It is pertinent to mention that PW-10 is the Doctor, who

examined PWs.1 and 2 and testified that PW-1 sustained laceration

measuring 7 X 2 X 1 Cms. on the occipital region and PW-2

sustained deep laceration at left frontal region and also a contusion

on the right shoulder region. It is further testified by PW-10 that

the injuries sustained by both PWs.1 and 2 are simple in nature,

caused by a blunt object.

14. Admittedly, for proving an offence under Section 307 of

IPC, the ingredients to be established are intention or knowledge

on the part of accused that his act would cause the death of the

victim. In the present case, except the motive, the intention to

cause the death of PWs.1 and 2 is lacking and therefore, the trial

Court has rightly held that the ingredients of Section 307 of IPC

are not at all attracted. Furthermore, as PWs.1 and 2 sustained

injuries in the hands of the accused, the trial Court has rightly

convicted the accused for the offence under Section 323 of IPC and

sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of Six

months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-.

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

15. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that

the incident took place in the year 2015 and the appellant has no

motive or intention to attack PWs.1 and 2 and the incident had

occurred in a spur of moment, and therefore, prayed to take a

lenient view by imposing fine instead of sentencing him to

imprisonment.

16. Section 323 of IPC reads as under :

"323. Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt :- Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both."

17. Taking into consideration the fact that the incident occurred

in the year 2015 and it was not caused by the appellant with either

motive or intention to cause the death of PWs.1 and 2, this Court is

of the considered view that the sentence of imprisonment imposed

against the appellant can be modified by imposing fine, which shall

be payable to the injured persons i.e. PWs.1 and 2.

18. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed confirming the

conviction of appellant for the offence under Section 323 of IPC,

GAC, J Crl.A.No.507 of 2017

however, the sentence imposed by the trial Court against the

appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for Six months, is

modified by imposing fine of Rs.10,000/-. The accused/appellant