Smt. Veerwati vs State of U.P.

Surendra Kumar , J.—Criminal revision is taken up in the revised list. Learned counsel for the revisionist has not appeared to argue the revision.

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The instant criminal revision has been preferred by Smt. Veerwati who was accused in the trial court against the judgment and order dated 25.5.2010, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Meerut, in Criminal Appeal No. 65 of 2004, Ved Singh and others v. State of U.P., arising out of the judgment and order dated 3.8.2004, passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, in Criminal Case No. 2660 of 2003 relating to Case Crime No. 36 of 1998, Police Station Brahmpuri, District Meerut, State v. Smt. Veerwati and others, by which the revisionist was convicted under Sections 323/34 and 324, I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500. In default of payment of fine, one month additional simple imprisonment. The revisionist was further convicted u/s 324, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000. In default of payment of fine, one month additional simple imprisonment. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

The relevant facts are that Criminal Case No. 2660 of 2003 was proceeded against the four accused persons Smt. Veerwati, Ved Singh, Lakhpat and Bhole under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506, I.P.C. in the court of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, (hereinafter referred to as the trial court). The trial court after recording evidence and hearing both the sides convicted Ved Singh, Bhole, Lakhpat and Smt. Veerwati u/s 323/34, I.P.C. by the impugned judgment and order dated 3.8.2004. Smt. Veerwati was further convicted u/s 324, I.P.C. and sentenced as stated above. All the accused persons including the revisionists were acquitted for offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506, I.P.C. The aforesaid criminal appeal was filed by all the four convicted accused persons and by the impugned judgment and order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Meerut, (hereinafter referred to as the appellate court), three appellants Ved Singh, Bhole and Lakhpat were acquitted u/s 323/34, I.P.C. The learned appellate court after going through the same evidence confirmed the conviction of Smt. Veerwati under Sections 323/34 and 324. I.P.C. and sentence as stated above.

Thus, the revisionist Smt. Veerwati dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the courts below and assailed the same in this revision. In the case in hand, a boy of four years was allegedly injured on 15.2.1998 around 5:00 p.m., when the first informant Nemwati was away for some work leaving the injured in the house. After coming back from work, the first informant was informed that the tongue of the boy was injured by the revisionist and blood was oozing out of tongue injury. Her report at Police Station was not correctly recorded and simple case of marpit was registered.

As per injury report of this boy dated 15.2.1998, he sustained one contusion on upper lip, second contusion on lower lip. Third injury was stitched one. It means that front portion of the tongue was also injured which oozed out blood on touching.

As per the prosecution case, tongue was injured by knife. The evidence of Dr. Raj Kumar P.W. 5 and that of Rajvir P.W. 6, tongue injury and other injuries could possibly be caused to the injured child by falling from some height namely by falling from some staircase. Injuries were said to be simple In nature.

Four persons were roped in this case who were convicted and sentenced by the trial court and out of them, three accused persons were acquitted by the appellate court as stated above.

I have gone through the impugned judgment and orders and material on record. It appears from record that the revisionist was present at the time of the pronouncement of the judgment of the appellate court on 25.5.2010 and at the time of dismissal of the appeal, she was taken in custody. When she was granted bail by this Court in the revision vide order dated 13.8.2010, the order granting bail to the revisionist was sent after 14.8.2010 to the court concerned and then she was released on bail. Considering the aforesaid evidence, nature of the injuries and facts and circumstances of the case, conviction of the revisionist Smt. Veerwati under Sections 323/34 and 324, I.P.C. recorded by the courts below is upheld. The sentence awarded to her as stated above is reduced and modified to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the revisionist. Her bail bonds and surety bonds are cancelled. She is on ball. She need not surrender. The instant revision is partly allowed.