Iqbal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6704 MP

                                  - : 1 :-



          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                   BENCH AT INDORE
             (S.B.: HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA)

                  Criminal Revision No.1638/2021

Iqbal S/o Babukha Qureshi,
aged about 41 years, Occupation- Unemployed,
S/o Juna Kabada, Utkhana Jaora, District Ratlam, M.P.

                                      Applicant/Revisionist
                                 Versus
State of M.P.
through Police Station- Jaora City,
District Ratlam.
                                      Non-applicant/ respondent
                                 **
      Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
      Ms. Harshlata Soni, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
                                 **
                         ORDER

(23.10.2021) With the consent of the parties, this case is heard finally. This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is directed against the judgment dated 16.07.2021 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Jaora District Ratlam in Criminal Appeal No.47/2018, wherein the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal by affirming the judgment dated 13.04.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jaora, District Ratlam in Criminal Case No. No.720/2014 whereby the applicant was convicted for offence under Section 14 of M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 ( hereinafter referred to as "Adhiniyam, 1990") and sentenced to undergo 1 year R.I. with fine of Rs. 3,000/-.

(2) Brief facts of the case are that the applicant/ accused was externed for the period of 10 months from the territory of District

- : 2 :-

Ratlam and nearby districts Dhar, Jhabua, Ujjain, Agar and Mandsaur vide order dated 23.09.2013 passed by District Magistrate Ratlam, (Exhibit P-3C) under Section 5(A) and (B) of the Adhiniyam, 1990, keeping in view of his criminal activities. The copy of said order was communicated to the applicant on 07.10.2013. (3) On 09.04.2014, Police Station- Jaora received a discrete information that present applicant has entered into the city and roaming around Unthana in violation of Exb/P-3C. Police force reached to the spot and called two witnesses. After seeing police, the applicant tried to flee away from the spot but police has arrested him and FIR under Section 14 of Adhiniyam, 1990 vide crime No.155/2014 was against him. He was sent to jail and vide order dated 15.04.2014, he was released on bail. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The applicant denied the charges, hence, prosecution examined four witnesses and exhibited six documents.

(4) Trial Court, while passing the judgment, convicted the applicant for offence punishable under Section 14 of M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 and sentenced to undergo 1 year R.I, with fine of Rs. 3,000/- An appeal was filed against the said conviction and sentence, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 16.07.2021 by First Additional Sessions Judge, Jaora, District Ratlam, which is under challenge in the present revision petition. (5) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this applicant has been falsely been implicated in this case. The copy of ex-parte order dated 23.09.2013 was never communicated to him by the competent authority. No such entry has been made in the Rojnamacha about the service of the aforesaid order. had it been communicated to him he would have challenged the said order by filing the appeal. The independent witness PW-1 has turned hostile.

- : 3 :-

The applicant has been convicted only on the testimony of police witnesses. By way alternate submissions, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is facing agony of the trial since 2014 and during this period he has not committed any offence and leading peaceful life. There is minimum sentence of four months for violation of section 14 of the Adhiniyam, 1990 out of which he has undergone three and half months, therefore, period of sentence may kindly be reduced from one year to the period already undergone. (6) Learned Government Advocate for the respondent State has submitted that the maximum sentence under Section 14 of Adhiniyam, 1990 is three years and out of which the learned trial court has awarded only one year sentence hence there is no scope of reduction as the applicant is found violating the order of externment, hence, the Courts below have rightly found guilty the applicant for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the applicant, hence, he prayed for dismissal of the revision petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of courts below.

(7) Vide order dated 23.09.2013, the applicant was externed for the period of 10 months. This order had communicated him on 07.10.2013, thereafter, he was arrested on 09.04.2014, therefore, out of 10 months he had already served the period of externment for 8 months, thereafter he was arrested and facing the agony of trial since last seven years.

(8) Though the applicant has not made any attempt to assail the finding of his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perused the record and especially therein having so perused, this Court does not find any infirmity in the conclusion

- : 4 :-

arrived at by the Courts below with regard to guilty of the appellant, inasmuch as on due consideration of the depositions of the prosecution witnesses and various documents exhibited during trial. I therefore, upheld the findings of conviction under Section 14 of M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 recorded by the Courts below. (9) Now the question arises as to whether the applicant's sentence should be reduced and if so, to what extent as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

(10) So far as the period of sentence is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that looking to the fact that the applicant is facing trial since 2014 and has already served more than 8 months of externment period awarded to him, thereafter he is in the jail since more than 3 months therefore, this Court is of the view that the jail sentence awarded to the applicant deserves to be and is hereby reduced from 1 year to the period of 4 months with no enhancement of fine amount .

With the aforesaid modification the criminal revision No.1638/2021 stands partly allowed and disposed of. The applicant be released from jail if not required in any crime after serving 4 months period and deposit of fine amount.

A copy of the judgment be sent to the Courts below along with record for information and compliance.

C.C. as per Rules.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE praveen

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN NAYAK Date: 2021.10.27 15:20:51 +05'30'