Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a criminal revision petition filed by two accused, Hioraj alias Yovraj Bandu Shende and Dulichand alias Dularam Bandu Shende, challenging their conviction under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The incident occurred on 16 October 1997 at about 10:30 a.m. when the accused were cutting a tree on the complainant Jagan's premises. When Jagan and his wife objected, the accused attacked Jagan: Hioraj struck him on the head with an axe, and Dulichand beat him with a stick, causing bleeding injuries. Jagan was taken to the hospital at Sadak Arjuni and later lodged a police report. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakoli, convicted the accused on 2 September 2000, sentencing them to simple imprisonment for one year. The accused appealed to the Sessions Court, but the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara, dismissed the appeal on 30 June 2003, upholding the conviction and sentence. The accused then filed the present revision petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The main legal issue was whether the High Court should interfere with the concurrent findings of fact in its revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioners' counsel argued that the courts below had erred in appreciating the evidence. However, the High Court, after hearing both sides, found no illegality or perversity in the concurrent findings. The court noted that the medical evidence corroborated the injuries, and the eyewitness testimony was consistent. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Concurrent Findings of Fact - Section 397 CrPC - The High Court in revision does not ordinarily interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless there is a patent illegality or perversity. The court found no such error in the conviction under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC for causing hurt by axe and stick. (Paras 5-6) B) Indian Penal Code - Voluntarily Causing Hurt by Dangerous Weapons - Section 324 IPC - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - The accused were convicted for causing hurt with an axe (dangerous weapon) and a stick, acting in furtherance of common intention. The medical evidence and eyewitness testimony supported the conviction. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and appellate court warrant interference in revision jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The conviction and sentence under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC are upheld.
Law Points
- Concurrent findings of fact not interfered with in revision
- Section 324 IPC requires dangerous weapon causing hurt
- Section 34 IPC common intention
- Revision jurisdiction limited under Section 397 CrPC
