Allahabad High Court
Ram Rattan And Another vs State Of U.P. on 21 January, 2020
Author: Suresh Kumar Gupta
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 25 of 1993 Appellant :- Ram Rattan And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- R.B. Sahai Counsel for Respondent :- A.Ga. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri J.P. Tripathi the learned AGA.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants against the judgement and order of Sri Swarup Lal II, Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur in S.T. No. 344 of 1989 dated 4.1.1993 convicting the appellants under Section 323 IPC and sentencing him to 1 year R.I. and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each in default of fine 4 months R.I. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.12.1987 FIR is lodged by Jawahar Kumari at about 11:50 a.m. lodged the NCR No. 148 under Sections 323/504 IPC against both the said accused person alleging that they had given him Rs. 20/- for submitting their application in the office of consolidation officer as he was going there on 29.12.1987 on his return, told the accused persons that Rs. 15 were spent on their application but the accused persons were insisting to return their Rs. 18/- otherwise they would beat him with kicks and fists. By means of this the deceased-Santosh Kumar was examined. Doctor reported the injury simple in nature and ultimately Santosh Kumar died after one month on 29.1.1988. Case is converted under Sections 323 and 504 IPC was converted under Section 304 IPC. Learned trial court convicted the appellant under Section 323 IPC and exonerated the appellants under Section 304 IPC. During trial appellant No.1 Ram Ratan died so the appeal is abated qua appellant No. 1.
Presently, appellant-Dinesh is the sole surviving appellant.
Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, this appeal is filed with the grounds that the learned trial court, without appreciating true facts, wrongly convicted the appellant and presently conviction and sentences awarded to him is too severe. It is further submitted that the date of incident is 17.7.1989 and co-accused Ram Batan had died about 7 years and presently, the sole-surviving appellant who is an old aged person, suffering from many ailments so the lenient view may be taken for him.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, conviction clause is maintained but the custodial sentence is awarded to undergone and fine is enhanced from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-, out of which, Rs. 9,000./- shall be given to the legal heirs of the deceased-Santosh within a period of one month from the date of this order.
With the aforesaid observation/directions this appeal is disposed of.
Lower court record be transmitted back to the trial court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 21.1.2020 Ankita