Hemanth Kumar vs State of Karnataka

Rathnakala, J.

This Revision Petition is preferred challenging the judgment of conviction recorded by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, K.G.F. on his file in C.C. No. 104/2010 in convicting the petitioner for the offences under Sections 324, 504, 506 Part-II and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, which was confirmed by the jurisdictional Fast Track Court, K.G.F. in Criminal Appeal No. 1/2011 dated 30th July 2011.

Facts in brief:

"On the complaint of one Ambeth, the respondent/Investigating Officer charge sheeted the petitioner herein in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 324, 504, 506 Part-II and 201 of IPC. The allegation was, on 3.1.2010 at 1.15 p.m., when the complainant approached the accused at his residence to question why he had filed a money suit against him, the accused got enraged, picked up a quarrel with him, assaulted him with a knife on his left cheek, caused injuries, abused him in filthy language and put threat to his life. The accused had appeared and was released on bail; charges were framed; accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 6 witnesses as PWs-1 to 6 and marked documents Exs. P1 to P5. After the closure of evidence of the prosecution, statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused did not lead defence evidence. After giving audience to both, the learned Magistrate found the accused guilty on all four counts and convicted him as below:

"In respect of offence u/s. 324 of IPC, S.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default to pay fine, further S.I. for ten days.

In respect of offence u/s. 504 of IPC, S.I. for one month and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default to pay fine, further S.I. for ten days.

In respect of offence u/s. 506(B) of IPC, S.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default to pay fine, further S.I. for ten days.

In respect of offence u/s. 201 of IPC, S.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default to pay fine, further S.I. for ten days.

50% of the fine amount is ordered to be paid to the complainant/injured as compensation."

After arguing for some time, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, in connection with the pending case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant had gone to the house of the accused. It was not a premeditated incident, but had occurred at the spur of the moment. The petitioner is not a habitual offender; he is a businessman running a Pharmacy. He hails from a respectable family. The weapon seized under the Mahazar is a knife, but the injuries found on the cheek of the complainant as per the wound certificate/Ex. P4 were all simple in nature. There is no history of previous enmity or ill will between the complainant and the accused. The trial court did not appreciate this aspect of the matter as mitigating circumstance and has imposed punishment, which is disproportionate to the charges proved. Under the circumstances, the punishment imposed may be scaled down, having regard to the circumstances, the incident occurred.

In reply, learned Government Pleader submits that, without disturbing the finding of conviction recorded by the court below, having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the complainant, there is no impediment to modify the punishment order.

In the light of the above submissions, now the focus is on the nature and quantum of punishment. There is force in the submission made for the appellant. Manifestly, the incident was instantaneous, fortunately not resulting in grievous injuries to the appellant. The incidence occurred when the complainant voluntarily approached the accused at his residence. The dispute between them was about money which the complainant owed to the accused. Prudently, the accused had initiated proceedings against complainant which annoyed the complainant. Both Courts below have not given advertence to this aspect of the matter as mitigating circumstance to diffuse the seriousness of the incidence.

Coming to the punishment contemplated under the respective penal provisions, the petitioner is found guilty. Section 324 of IPC is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

The offence under Section 504 of IPC is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

The offence under Section 506 Part-II of IPC is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.

The offence under Section 201 of IPC is dependant on the main offences.

In the background of the above, I am of the considered opinion that, instead of the punishment of S.I. with the fine amount as ordered by the court below, if he is ordered to pay fine amount only as below, in my considered opinion, that is sufficient to serve the ends of justice.

"Rs. 10,000/-for the offence under 324 of IPC;

For offence under Section 504 of IPC, with a fine of Rs. 5,000/;-

For offence under Section 506 Part-II of IPC, with a fine of Rs. 3,000/-and

For offence under Section 201 of IPC, with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- that would serve the ends of justice."

Accordingly, this Revision Petition is allowed in part.

The judgment of conviction passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, K.G.F. on his file in C.C. No. 104/2010 dated 10.12.2010, which is confirmed by the jurisdictional Fast Track Court, K.G.F. in Criminal Appeal No. 1/2011 dated 30th July 2011, is maintained. The sentence imposed by the learned Magistrate is modified as below:--

"In respect of offence u/s. 324 of IPC, he shall pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-; in default to pay fine, he shall undergo S.I. for six months.

In respect of offence u/s. 504 of IPC, he shall pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default to pay fine, he shall undergo S.I. for three months.

In respect of offence u/s. 506 Part-II of IPC, he shall pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/-; in default to pay fine, he shall undergo S.I. for one month.

In respect of offence u/s. 201 of IPC, he shall pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-; in default to pay fine, he shall undergo S.I. for ten days."

Out of the fine amount so deposited by the petitioner, 50% of the same shall be paid to the complainant as compensation.

The bail bond executed by the petitioner stands discharged.