Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 335 ipc in Senthil Kumar vs State Rep. By on 21 September, 2020Matching Fragments
3.Heard Mr.T.Senthilkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Robinson, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police.
4.At the out set, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that even admitting the offence, it would fall only under section 335 of IPC and not under section 326 IPC, which could be compounded under section 320 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the PW1 / defacto complainant has already filed an affidavit before this Court that they have solved their issues amicably. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has already undergone 90 days imprisonment pending trial and requested this Court to reduce the sentence to the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner.
3. On going through the evidence given by PW1, it is clear that it was he who questioned the accused regarding the previous incident and there ensued a wordy altercation and then a scuffle. It was during that scuffle the accused bit the http://www.judis.nic.in right ear of PW1 causing the injury as stated above.
Therefore, accepting the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the offence would fall only under Sec.335 IPC and not 326 IPC, the conviction is to be altered to one under Sec.335 IPC.
While setting aside the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner for offence punishable under Sec.326 IPC, the petitioner is convicted of the offence under Sec.335 IPC and he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation to PW1, the injured/complainant. In default of payment of the compensation amount, the petitioner will undergo S.I. for two months.
11.The facts and the circumstances of the case falls within the ambit of Section 335 of IPC. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the further developments, this Court is inclined to partly allow this petition, modifying the conviction for the offence under section 335 of IPC instead of 326 IPC and modified the sentence as a period already under gone by him.