Karthick vs The State Rep By Inspector Of … on 26 August, 2020


Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Supreme Court of India

Karthick vs The State Rep By Inspector Of … on 26 August, 2020

Author: Ashok Bhushan

Bench: Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy, M.R. Shah

                                                       1


                                                                       NON­REPORTABLE

                                    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICITON

                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.543 OF 2020
                              [Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 2040 of 2020]


         Karthick & Ors.                                                    .. Appellants

                                                     Versus

         The State represented by Inspector of Police,
         Kancheepuram District, Tamil Nadu                                  .. Respondent


                                               JUDGMENT

M. R. Shah, J.

Leave granted.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned

judgment and order dated 24.04.2019 passed by the High Court of

Judicature at Madras in Criminal Revision Case No. 118 of 2012 by

which the High Court has dismissed the said revision application
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
MEENAKSHI KOHLI

and has confirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned
Date: 2020.08.26
14:48:27 IST
Reason:

Trial Court convicting the appellant herein – original accused for
2

the offences under Sections 147, 323, 325, 323 read with 149 and

325 read with 149 IPC, the original accused have preferred the

present appeal.

3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that vide order dated

24.02.2020 this Court found no ground to interfere with the

judgment of conviction. However, it was ordered to issue notice

only on quantum of sentence. Therefore, now the quantum of

sentence only is required to be considered by this Court.

4. As per the judgment and order passed by the learned Trial

Court, the maximum sentence to be undergone by the appellants­

accused is one year S.I. The learned Trial Court also passed the

order that out of the total amount of fine of Rs.30,000/­,

Rs.10,000/­ is to be given to the grievously injured person–

Saravanan (P.W.3) by way of compensation.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has stated

that, by now, the accused have undergone sentence of

approximately six months. It is submitted that there was a delay of

12 days in lodging the FIR; that the injuries were very minor
3

injuries and P.W.3 had a minor fracture on the finger; that the

incident had occurred all of a sudden for plucking the Jamun and

there was no intention to cause the injuries. Therefore, it is prayed

to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, while

opposing the prayer to reduce the sentence, has vehemently

submitted that as observed by the learned Trial Court and the

findings confirmed by the High Court, the injuries were grievous

injuries and therefore no sympathy should be shown to the accused

persons.

7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respective parties and, in the facts and circumstances of the case,

more particularly, considering the fact that at the time of incident,

the accused persons were aged between 21 and 23 years and the

incident had taken place all of a sudden and the cause was

plucking the Blackberries (Jamuns). P.W.3, as per the medical

evidence, sustained a fracture on the finger and other suffered light
4

injuries. By now, all the accused persons have undergone the

sentence for approximately six months. The maximum sentence to

be undergone as per the judgment and order passed by the learned

Trial Court and confirmed by the High Court shall be for one year

S.I. Therefore, if the sentence is reduced to the period already

undergone and the compensation awarded to P.W.3 who sustained

grievous injuries is further enhanced by Rs.25,000/­, it will meet

the ends of justice.

8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the

present appeal is allowed in part. The conviction of the accused for

the offences under Sections 147, 323, 325, 323 read with 149 and

325 read with 149 IPC is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence

imposed by the learned Trial Court and confirmed by the High

Court is hereby modified and reduced to the period already

undergone and the amount of compensation to be paid to P.W.3–

Sarvanan is further enhanced by Rs.25,000/­ and the same shall

be paid to P.W.3 within a period of six weeks from today. The
5

learned Trial Court is directed to ensure that the enhanced amount

of compensation i.e. Rs.25,000/­ is paid to P.W.3–Saravanan by the

accused persons as per the present order.

…………………………….J.

[R. SUBHASH REDDY]

…………………………..J.

[M. R. SHAH]
New Delhi;

August 26, 2020



Source link