Sanju Alias Kalu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8684 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR


        [Single Bench : Hon'ble Smt. Justice Anjuli Palo]

                     Criminal Appeal No. 1837 of 2012

                                  Sanju alias Kalu
                                          Vs.
                          The State of Madhya Pradesh

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Ms. Sarita Kanojiya, learned counsel for the appellant.
        Ms. Ranjana Agnihotri, learned Govt. Adv. for the respondent/State.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                JUDGMENT (Oral)

(15/12/2021)

This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved

by the judgment dated 28.07.2012 passed by the Ninth Additional

Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Session Trial No. 434 of 2011, whereby

appellant has been convicted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal

Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years

with fine of Rs.100/.

2. As per prosecution case the appellant had committed

robery of golden chain on 18.5.2009 at about 7.40 o'clock, which

belongs to one Madhu Sharma. On the report lodged by her, the Police

Station T.T. Nagar, Bhopal registered the offence under Section 392

of IPC. During investigation, the looted property was recovered from

the posssession of the appellant.

3. The charge sheet was filed against the appellant before

the concerning court. After trial, the learned court below found the

testimoney of the complainant to be trustworthy, which is supported

by other witnesses. They belong to the proceeindg of the seizure memo

prepared by the Police before them on the memorandum of the

appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. During investigation,

the complainant duly identified the appellant and also identified the her

gold chain, which was mixed with four to five gold chains at the

time of identificiation parade, (Ex. P-4).

4. The aforesaid evidence has not been challenged by learned

counsel for the appellant. The Panch Witnesses have also supported the

prosecution case and testimoney of Investigationg Officer. They are

impartial witnesses. There is no lacuna or any other weakness in their

evidence, which indicated that they are the interested witnesses or

pocket witnesses of the Police. On their evidence and the complainant

evidence, the charges levelled against the appellant are properly

proved withiout any reasonable doubt. Thus, this court comes to the

conclusion that the trial court has rightly convicted the appellant on

apprecation of evidence. Consequently, no ground is available to

interfere in the findings of the trial court. The sentence awarded

against the appellant is just and proper because the appellant is

habitual offender of committing the offence punishable under Section

392 of IPC. The Police has produced a list of criminal history of the

appellant in which twenty cases of the same nature, i.e under Section

392 of IPC are registered against him.

5. In view of aforesaid discussion, this court is not inclined to

interefere in the sentence awarded against the appellant.

6. The appeal is hereby dismissed.

7. Copy of this judgment be sent to the Court below for

information and compliance alongwith its record.

(Smt. Anjuli Palo) Judge

bks

BASANT KUMAR SHRIVAS 2021.12.16 16:54:34 +05'30'

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR

Criminal Appeal No. 1837 of 2012 ( Sanju alias Kalu Vs.The State of Madhya Pradesh

Jabalpur, dated 15.12.2021

Ms. Sarita Kanojiya, learned counsel for the appellant. Ms. Ranjana Agnihotri, learned Govt. Adv. for the respondent/State.

Arguments heard. Perused the record.

Judgment passed, signed and dated in the separate sheets.

(Smt. Anjuli Palo) Judge

bks