Ram Singh vs State Of M.P
- SCC(2011) 14 SCC 563
- AIRAIR 2011 SC Supp 48
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code rests on an injury of very small dimension, and the other injuries occasioned are simple in nature on the hands, and a substantial period of time has elapsed since the incident (here, eighteen years), a sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment is excessive and may be reduced to two years rigorous imprisonment.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
RAM SINGH ..... APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ..... RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. We had issued noticed on the quantum of sentence only on the 21st of April, 2011 in this matter where a sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine has been awarded under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija has put in appearance on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
4. The injuries that had been caused by the appellant are given herein below:
"(i) incised wound =" X <" on right side below abdomen (illiac cosa)
(ii) incised wound >" X <" muscle deep on right middle palm.
(iii) incised wound 1" X =" muscle deep on right hand above 3" on wrist, (iv) incised wound 1.5" X <" on left hand thumb and middle in index finger."
5. We see that injury No. 1 is the only injury which Crl.A. No. of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 2594 of 2011
2
could invite the applicability of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. This too is an injury of very small dimension. The other injuries are on the hand and are simple in nature. The incident happened in the year 1993 and 18 years have elapsed since then. We, therefore, feel that the sentence of five years awarded to the appellant is somewhat excessive. We, partly allow this appeal and reduce the sentence on the appellant from five to two years rigorous imprisonment, the other parts of the sentence being maintained as it is.
.....................J
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI]
.....................J
[GYAN SUDHA MISRA]
NEW DELHI
JULY 18, 2011.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free