Crl .A.  No.      of 2010 @ SLP(Crl.) 1738/2009 1

               IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   

         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1877 OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No. 1738/2010)

JAGADISH  @ JAGANNATH  ..  APPELLANT(S)

vs.

STATE OF KARNATAKA ..  RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

This  appeal  is  directed  against  the  judgment  and  

order dated 20th August, 2008, passed by the Karnataka High  

Court  in  Criminal  Revision  Petition  No.  70  of  2007  

disposing of the same on the ground that the courts below  

had  concurrently  found  that  the  charges  had  been  proved  

against the appellant herein beyond reasonable doubt.

As would appear from the impugned judgment, there was  

a  fight  between  the  accused  persons  and  the  prosecution  

witnesses in which some injury was caused to Vijayendra –  

P.W. 1, Ramesha -P.W. 2 and Nagaraju – P.W. 3.  Ultimately,  

charge sheet was submitted under Sections 323, 324, 326,  

506 read with Section 34 IPC and based on the evidence of  

P.Ws.1  to  3  who  were  the  injured  witnesses,  and  the  

doctor's evidence, the trial court convicted the appellants

Crl .A.  No.      of 2010 @ SLP(Crl.) 1738/2009 2

for the offence punishable under Sections 326 and 506  of  

the Indian Penal Code [IPC].  On conviction, the appellant  

No.  1  was  sentenced  to  two  years'  rigorous  imprisonment  

under  Section  326  IPC  and  one  year's  imprisonment  under  

Section 506 IPC.  Against the said judgment an appeal was  

preferred and the Appellate Court modified the judgment by  

confirming the conviction of the accused Nos. 1 and 2, but  

released  accused  No.  3  under  the  Probation  of  Offenders  

Act, while acquitting the fourth accused.

The matter was ultimately carried in revision to the  

High  Court  which  confirmed  the  judgment  of  the  learned  

Sessions Judge at Mandya.  Aggrieved thereby, this Special  

Leave Petition was filed by the accused Nos. 1 and 3.

Before we proceed further, let it be recorded that  

vide  order  dated  20th January,  2010,  of  this  Court,  the  

Special  Leave  Petition  of  the  petitioner  No.  2  was  

dismissed.   Thus  the  present  appeal  arises  out  of  the  

Special Leave Petition and is confined to the accused No. 1  

only.  

From the nature of injuries disclosed in the evidence  

adduced and the evidence of the Doctor who treated P.W. 1,  

it seems that two of the injuries, namely,  the breaking of  

three ribs and a tooth, were found to be grievous by the  

said doctor.

Considering  the  fact  that  the  incident  took  place

Crl .A.  No.      of 2010 @ SLP(Crl.) 1738/2009 3

about ten years ago on 30th October, 2000, and the injuries  

are also not of any grievous nature and particularly, in the

absence of any weapon as such and in the result and since  

the  appellant  has  already  undergone  one  year's  

imprisonment, out of the sentence of two years awarded to  

him, we are inclined to reduce the sentence to the period  

already undergone.

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds.  The appellant is  

sentenced to the period of imprisonment already undergone.  

He  be released forthwith, if not required in any other  

case.

                  .......................J.         (ALTAMAS KABIR)

                  .......................J.

                                (A.K. PATNAIK) New Delhi,

   September 27, 2010.