1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 13 th OF APRIL, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1161 of 1999
BETWEEN:-
1. GHANSHYAM SINGH S/O MOTI SINGH AGE 19
YEARS OCC- AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE
DEEPKHEDI, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. KHUSHAL SINGH S/O MOTISINGH, AGED ABOUT
26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
VILLAGE DEEPKHEDI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(SHRI SHIVENDRA SINGH RAWAT - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION
KHACHROD UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI TARUN PAGARE - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant no.2 Karan Singh has died. His name has already been deleted from the array of appellants.
In view of the aforesaid, the present appeal stands abated so far appellant no.2 Karan Singh is concerned.
This is appeal u/S.374 of the Cr.P.C. arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 17.08.1999 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in ST No.110/1995 whereby the appellants have been convicted u/S 307, 325 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5,3 years each and fine of Rs.500-500/-each Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 13/04/2023 5:22:46 PM 2 with default stipulation.
Counsel for appellants submits that the appellant no.1 Ghanshyam has already undergone jail sentence of 2 months and 22 days and appellant no.3 Kushal has already undergone jail sentence of 2 months 5 days and the incident had taken place in the year 1994. The appellants were on bail during trial and appeal and did not misuse the liberty. They maintained good record and relation with the complainants. No purpose would be served in sending the appellants in jail after such long period. Therefore, the appellants may be sentenced to the period already undergone and fine amount may be increased which may be directed to be paid to the complainants Jhujhar Singh, Tej Singh and Kailash. Counsel for State do not dispute the aforesaid facts. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the jail sentence of the appellants and the period already undergone by them, I am of the opinion that a case is made out for sentencing the appellants to the period already undergone with enhancement of fine amount. Further the incident had taken place in the year 1994 and the appellants have maintained good record and did not misuse the liberty. No purpose would be served in sending the appellants in jail after such long period.
Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained. The jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the fine amount is enhanced under section 307 IPC from Rs.500/- to Rs.10,000/- and under section 325 IPC from Rs.500/- to Rs.5000/-. Out of enhanced amount, Rs.5000/- each will be distributed to the complainants by the Trial Court. The appellants shall deposit the enhanced amount within the period of two months from today. The bail bonds of the appellants shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount. In case if the appellants fails to deposit the fine amount within Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 13/04/2023 5:22:46 PM 3 the aforesaid period, the appellants shall undergo the remaining jail sentence as per the order of appellate court.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Sourabh Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 13/04/2023 5:22:46 PM