Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pramod Singh Gond vs State Of Mp Theorug P.S. Ramnagar ... on 5 January, 2022
Author: Virender Singh
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Criminal Appeal No.6964/2021
(Pramod Singh Gond vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.)
Jabalpur, Dated 05/01/2022.
Shri I.S. Yadav, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Surdeep Khampariya, Ld. Panel Lawyer for respondent-
State.
Heard on I.A. No.20710/2021.
This is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for
condonation of delay.
As the appeal has been filed within time, therefore, no order is
required to be passed on the aforesaid I.A.
With consent the appeal is finally heard.
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order
dated 20/12/2019 passed by the Special Court Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, District Anuppur
(M.P.) in SC/ART/78/2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted
under Section 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6
months with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of fine to undergo additional
R.I. for 1 month.
2. It is the case of prosecution that on 20/11/2017 complainant
Vinod Dagaur (P.W-1) lodged a report to the effect that on the
preceding night he had gone to attend a function in the house of Vijay
Yadav, when he was about to reach the house of Vijay Yadav, co-
accused Deepak Pal came and abused him, he also slapped him stating
that he has defamed him by doubting that he has stolen a vehicle. He
also pressed his throat. Co-accused Chhotu @ Pradeep Singh, Ravi
Gond and appellant Pramod Singh also joined him at this stage and
beat complainant Vijay Dagaur by kicks and fists.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant Pramod Singh submitted
that he does not want to press the appeal on merits. His only prayer is
with regard to the period of sentence awarded to the appellant.
4. It is submitted that the co-accused, the present appellant and
complainant were friends earlier, but some misunderstanding
developed between them. There is no allegation against the appellant
to cause any severe injury. There is no evidence with regard to the
preparation, premeditation or intention, the incident had taken place all
of a sudden. The allegation made against the appellant is that he
alongwith co-accused persons beat the complainant by kicks and fists.
Only a simple complaint of pain and redness in eye of the complainant
has been observed by the doctor. The appellant is 21 years of age. It is
a dispute between the friends on a petty issue and the appellant has no
criminal antecedents. After the default in appearance, he has
surrendered before the Court and is in custody since 22/10/2021 and
has served out sentence of 2½ months without remission, therefore, his
sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone.
5. Ld. P.L. has opposed the prayer, but has not refuted the fact
regarding the incident, the injury and other facts claimed by the
appellant.
6. The record also supports the submission of the counsel for the
appellant. The appellant has been found guilty for the offence under
Section 323 IPC.
7. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the accusation made
against the appellant, the injury caused to the victim, the period of
custody, the period of trial he has faced and other facts and
circumstances of the case, I deem appropriate to accede the prayer of
the appellant, therefore, the appeal preferred by the appellant Pramod
Singh is partly allowed. His conviction under Section 323/34 IPC is
confirmed, however, looking to the accusation made against the
appellant and other facts and circumstances of the case, his sentence is
modified and reduced to the period already undergone.
8. The appellant be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any
other case.
9. With the aforesaid modification, the appeal is partly allowed and
disposed of.
(Virender Singh)
Judge
rv
Digitally signed by REENA
HIMANSHU SHARMA
Date: 2022.01.07 17:27:11
+05'30'
