Jaalam Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 16375 MP

                                   1
 IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       AT INDORE
                         BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                   ON THE 9 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4433 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
1.    JAALAM SINGH S/O LATE SHRI RAMSINGH, AGED
      ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
      GRAM BHAGSARA TEHSIL SONKACHH DISTRICT
      DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    SANJAY S/O SHRI JALAM SINGH, AGED ABOUT 25
      YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O GRAM
      BHAGSARA TEHSIL SONKACHH DISTT DEWAS
      (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.    BHAGIRATH S/O LATE RAMSINGH, AGED ABOUT
      75  YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O
      GRAM BHAGSARA TEHSIL SONKACHH DISTT
      DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....PETITIONER
(SHRI ARPIT SINGH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS .

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION SECURITY
CENTRE SONKACHH DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
( SHRI SUDHANSHU VYAS PL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE
GENERAL.

      Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
                                    ORDER

With consent of the parties heard finally.

This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C.has been filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the judgment dated 11.11.2022 passed by the

learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sonkach district Dewas in Cr.A.No.4/2022 whereby the learned appellate Court has affirmed the judgement dated 20.05.2022 passed by JMFC, Sonkach, Dewas and awarded the sentence to the petitioner under Section 323 and 323/34 of IPC for s 3-3 Monsh R.I. with fine of Rs.1000/- 1000/- for each sentence with default stipulations.

The petitioners have preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners did not press this revision on merit and not assails the finding part of judgment. He confines his argument on the point of sentence only and prays that since the

petitioners have already undergone 01 months out of three months, their sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. It is further submitted that the incident had happened way back in the year 2016 and they are facing the trial since long. The age of the petitioners are 50, 25 & 75 years. It is further submitted that the petitioners deserves some leniency as the petitioners already suffered the ordeal of the trial since 2016 and they are first offender. It is further submitted that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of this revision.

Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be just and proper. Hence, finding force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the fact that the petitioners suffered the ordeal of criminal case since 2016, this Court finds it expedient to partly allow this revision

petition by affirming the conviction of the petitioners by reducing the sentence to the period already undergone.

Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioners is hereby reduced to the sentence already undergone subject to deposit fine as awarded by learned trial Court within seven days. The learned trial Court has already awarded the fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 323 of IPC which is maximum, hence, the impugned order qua the fine amount and seizure of property, is also affirmed.

It is made clear that if the petitioners fail to comply with the conditions as stipulated by this Court, as aforesaid, then the order of the court below shall be revived and petitioners shall suffer the jail sentence as already imposed by the trial Court.

Pending I.A. if any stands closed.

A copy of this order be send to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

C.C.as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE amit

Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.12.09 19:03:29 +05'30'