Ramesh And 3 Anr. vs State Of M.P. And Anr.
2022 Latest Caselaw 16921 MP

                                                              1
                            IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                              ON THE 20 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 634 of 2012

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    RAMESH S/O BHARAT LAL, AGED ABOUT 45
                                 YEAR S, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTRIST VILLAGE
                                 BAMBORI DISTT. RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    KAILASH S/O BHARAT LAL , AGED ABOUT 35
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VIL.
                                 BAMBORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    SUBHASH S/O BHARAT LAL, AGED ABOUT 41
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VIL.
                                 BAMBORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    PRAKASH S/O BHARAT LAL , AGED ABOUT 48
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VIL.
                                 BAMBORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....PETITIONER
                           (SHRI AMISH SANGHVI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER)

                           AND
                           1.    STATE OF M.P. GOVT. THRU. P.S. BILPANK DISTT.
                                 RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    DISTRICT MAGISTRATRE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           ( MS. VARSHA THAKUR, DY.G.A. FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)

                                 T h is revision coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 21-12-2022 19:10:58

the petitioners being aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.06.2012 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam in Cr.A.No.66/2012 modifying the judgment passed by JMFC, Ratlam in criminal case No. 3441/2008, whereby the petitioners have been convicted for offence under Section for offence under Sections 324, 324/34 and 323 of IPC and sentenced to 6 months R.I. each, 2 months R.I. each(on each count) with fine of Rs.1,000/- and 300/- each (on each count) 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 07 days in jail incarceration, their sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. It is further submitted that the incident had taken place on some quarrel between the petitioners and the complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioners deserve some leniency as the petitioners already suffered the ordeal of the trial since 2008 i.e.for a period o f 14 years. It is further submitted that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount.

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 contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the fact that the petitioners suffered the ordeal of criminal case since 2008, this Court finds it expedient to partly allow this revision Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 21-12-2022 19:10:58

petition by affirming the conviction of the petitioners, however, reducing the sentence to the period already undergone by increasing the fine amount.

Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioners is hereby reduced to the sentence already undergone b y increasing the fine amount from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs.2,500/- each and fine amount from Rs. 300/- to Rs. 1,000/- each to be paid within a period of two months from today. Since the petitioners are already on bail, their bail bonds stand discharged. 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 appellate Court shall be revived and petitioners shall suffer the jail sentence as already imposed by the appellate Court.

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

C.C.as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE vatan

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 21-12-2022 19:10:58