Rajesh Tiwari vs The State Of M.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 305 MP

                                              1




  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR


SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE JUSTICE NANDITA DUBEY.

            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2692 OF 1997

Appellant                    :              Rajesh Tiwari.

                                                   Vs.
Respondent                   :              State of Madhya Pradesh.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Sanjeev Saxena, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the
State.

                             JUDGMENT

(06/01/2022)

This criminal appeal has been filed by the

appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated

08.12.1997, passed by the Special Judge, Shahdol,

District Shahdol (M.P.) in Special Case No.43/97, whereby

appellant has been found guilty for the offence

punishable under Section 323 of IPC and Section 3(I)(II)

of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short

'the Atrocities Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.100/- with a

stipulation for one month further rigorous imprisonment

in case of default and rigorous imprisonment for six

months, respectively.

2. As per prosecution, complainant Kusum Devi

has lodged a complaint that she went out for call of

nature along with her sister on the fateful night where

the preset appellant caught hold of her, when she

struggled and shouted for help he pushed her away and

tried to forcibly take her sister, she also struggled and

ultimately was left behind.

3. On the basis of the charge-sheet under Sections

323 and 354 of IPC and Section 3(I)(II) of the Atrocities

Act was filed against the appellant, the Trial Court after

detailed evaluation of the oral as well as documentary

evidence on record convicted the present appellant under

the sections aforestated.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has

submitted that no offence under Section 3(I)(II) of the

Atrocities Act is made out against the present appellant

as there is no allegation against him with regard to the

same. It is pointed out that only because the complainant

belonged to particular caste, this offence has been

registered against him.

5. I have gone through the entire record. There is

no allegation in the FIR or in the evidence before the

Court that the present appellant has used abusive

language or hurled insults at them by taking name of

their caste. Under the circumstances, the offence under

Section 3(I)(II) of the Atrocities Act is not made out.

Hence, the conviction and sentence for the offence under

Section 3(I)(II) of the Atrocities Act is set aside.

6. It is evident from the MLC report, only simple

injuries (abrasion) have been caused to the complainant

which as per MLC report may be a result of fall. Under

the facts and circumstances, the conviction under Section

323 of IPC is upheld. So far as the sentence is concerned,

prima facie it appears to be disproportionate and

excessive. The appellant has remained in jail for some

time. It is informed that the appellant is on bail. Sending

the appellant for undergoing the jail sentence of one year

after a period of 25 years will not be proper and too

harsh on him.

7. Under the circumstances, the appellant is

sentenced to the period already undergone by him

however, the fine amount is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-,

which shall be deposited before the trial Court within a

period of three months.

8. This criminal appeal stands partly allowed.

(Nandita Dubey) Judge sjk

SHARAN JEET KAUR JASSAL 2022.01.07 12:20:49 +05'30'