Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pankaj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 February, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 4th OF FEBRUARY, 2022
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2672 of 2021
Between:-
PANKAJ S/O BABULAL BAMNIYA , AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABORER RATITLAE JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI APOORV JOSHI, LEARNED COUNSEL)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH
P.S. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SUDHANSHU VYAS, LEARNED COUNSEL )
ORDER
Heard on I.A. No.28587/2021, which is an application under
Section 4 of Limitation Act.
This revision is barred by 609 days, hence application for
condonation of delay has been filed. As per status report received
from District Jail Jhabua the appellant is in jail since 21.12.2020,
hence he could not prefer revision within time. One of the Criminal
Revision filed by applicant has been disposed of by this Court after
condoning the delay.
In view of the above, I.A. No.28587/2021 is allowed and
stands closed.
Heard on the question of admission.
This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401
of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the
judgment dated 05.09.2019 passed by First Additional Sessions
Judge, Jhabua in Cri. Appeal 125/2017, confirming the judgment
- : 2 :-
dated 24.06.2017 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhabua in
Criminal Case No. 2545/2016, by which the applicant has been
convicted under Section 457 and 380 of I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo 3-3 years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.
The briefly stated prosecution story is that, the complainant
Anil Soni lodged a report that on 15.11.2015, he went to the house of
his sister and when he came back, found that jewelry worth of Rs.
1,00,000/- has been theft. An FIR bearing crime No.699/2016 has
been registered against unknown persons. During the investigation,
accused Dharmendra, Pankaj and Rajesh have been arrested in this
case. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed.
The prosecution, in order to sustain their case, has examined
PW-1 to PW-7 and marked EX.P/1 to EX.P/13. All the accused were
questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in
respect of incriminating materials available against them and all the
accused pleaded not guilty of the charges framed against them. On
behalf of the accused, no defence witness has been examined.
The Trial Court, on a consideration of the oral and
documentary evidence, has convicted and sentenced the accused as
stated above. Against the same the applicant has preferred Criminal
Appeal before the Appellate Court, which has also come to
dismissed. Hence, this revision petition.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits
that the applicant is not assailing the conviction on merit but prays
for reduction of sentence from 3 years to the period already
undergone as he has undergone 1 years 10 months in jail in the
present case. He has already undergone jail sentence in crime
No.743/2015. In this case, he has formally arrested on 29.09.2016.
Apart from two cases, no other criminal cases are pending and he is
facing trial since 2016.
- : 3 :-
Learned counsel for the State submits that after due
appreciation of the evidence learned Courts below have found the
applicant guilty of the aforesaid offence. It is submitted that the
revisional jurisdiction of this Court is limited and no interference is
called for in the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of
the record, it is noticed that the commission of the alleged offence by
the applicant is established on the basis of the statements of
witnesses and the Courts below have rightly believed the testimony
of the said prosecution witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid and on the basis of the material
available on the record, this Court is of the opinion that the courts
below have not committed any illegality in convicting the appellant
for offence as stated above .
So far as the period of sentence is concerned, I am of the
considered opinion that looking to the fact that the applicant has
already suffered sufficient period in custody, therefore, the sentence
awarded to the applicant is reduced from 3 years to the period
already undergone. So far as fine amount is concerned, same is
enhanced from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs.3,000/-, on non payment of fine to
further undergo three months simple imprisonment.
With the aforesaid modification in the judgment of conviction
and sentence, the revision petition is partly allowed.
Let a copy of this Order be sent to the concerned courts
alongwith the records.
( VIVEK RUSIA )
JUDGE
praveen
PRAVEEN NAYAK
2022.02.07
12:01:32 +05'30'
