Mahendrasingh vs State Of M.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 6383 MP

-1-                                                  CRA No.913/2009

  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
                             CRA NO.913/2009
Mahindra Singh s/o Sohansingh
Age 50, occupation Driver
R/o Guna Chowk, Jalandhar,
Punjab                                     ........Appellant.
vs.
State of M.P through police station
Kshipra, district Indore M.P                .......Respondent.

04.10.2021: (Indore):

None for the appellant.

Shri A.S.Sisodiya, learned GA for the State.

Shri Jitendra Mandloi, Advocate who is present in the Court is requested to inspect the record and address the Court on behalf of the appellant.

This is an appeal sent from jail by appellant Mahindra Singh against his conviction and sentenced passed in S.T.No.171/03 passed by XIIIth A.S.J, Indore.

Shri Jitendra Mandloi, learned counsel after going through the record submits that before registering this appeal, the appellant had already filed another criminal appeal i.e. CRA No.886/2007 against the same judgment of conviction and sentence which was heard and decided by this Court along with CRA No.1372/2006 filed by co- accused Sukkha @ Sukhdev @ Mansingh and both the appeals were allowed partly vide judgment dated 13.10.2009. The operative part of the said judgment is reproduced below:

9. For the offence under Section 397 of the IPC prosecution is obliged to establish specific overt act of the accused regarding use of deadly weapon or possession of deadly weapon, which was clearly visible to victim at the time of incident. The accused persons cannot be convicted for this offence with the aid of section 34 or 149 of the IPC and individual act of the accused has to be proved by the prosecution (see Phool Kumar vs. Delhi Administration (AIR 1975 SC 905).

10. In the result, these appeals are allowed in part. Conviction and sentence of appellants under section 394/397 of the IPC are hereby set aside, instead thereof they are convicted under Section 394 of the IPC and sentenced to the period already undergone with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine they shall suffer

-2- CRA No.913/2009

additional RI for one year. Appellant Sukkha alias Sukhdev is in jail since last 6 years and one month, whereas appellant Mahendra Singh has completed 5 years and two days. Conviction and sentence of appellants under section 365 of the IPC are also affirmed. All the jail sentences shall run concurrently.

Another co-accused Gurmesh Singh has also filed another Criminal Appeal No.508/2004 which was also been heard and decided by this Court vide judgment dated 4.3.2009. Since the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant has already been set aside/modified in Criminal Appeal No.886/2007 vide judgment dated 13.10.2009, therefore, no orders are required to be passed in this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal also stands disposed of.

      (VIVEK RUSIA)                      (SHAILENDRA SHUKLA)
        JUDGE                                     JUDGE

       Digitally signed by HARI
       KUMAR C G NAIR
       Date: 2021.10.05 18:18:38
hk/    +05'30'