Baljeet Kuchbandiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 457 MP

                                                                                              1

                       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
                                                                             (Single Bench)
                                                       Criminal Appeal No. 7000/2021
                                    HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
                                                                      Baljeet Kuchbandiya
                                                                                          Vs.
                                                            The State of Madhya Pradesh
Appearance:
Shri Prasanna Namdeo, Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Prem Narayan Verma, Panel Lawyer for the respondent State.
CORAM                                                                           Hon'ble Shri Justice Virender Singh
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                         JUDGMENT

(10.01.2022)

Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 21.10.2021 delivered by VI

Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No. 655/2021, the

appellant has preferred this appeal. The Trial Court has convicted the appellant

under Sections 379 Indian Penal Code and has awarded one year's rigorous

imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in an F.I.R it is

mentioned that at the time of the incident the complainant along with his friend

Mohd. Shadab was going towards their house and as they reached near Itwara

Masjid, a boy wearing red shirt pounced on him, snatched his mobile and ran

away towards Kanjar Basti. While in Court, complainant Nitin Agrawal has

stated that on the date of the incident when he was having tea along with his

friend, an unknown boy pounced on him, snatched his mobile and ran away

toward Central Library. They chased him and at some distance they noticed

that he is standing near Shahjahani Park. They made a call to the Police, after

about 10-15 minutes police reached on the spot, the applicant stayed there by

that time, the Police apprehended him and on search recovered the Mobile.

3. The complainant and his friend Mohd. Shadab both have admitted that

they could identify the applicant on the basis of red shirt he was wearing at the

time of the incident but that shirt has not been seized.

4. The appellant was charged under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

He abjured his guilt and prayed for trial. After the trial he has been convicted

and sentenced as stated in paragraph 1 above.

5. The appellant has preferred the appeal on the several grounds; however,

learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press the

appeal on merits. His limited prayer is that the jail sentence may be reduced to

the period already undergone by imposing some fine upon him. It is submitted

that the appellant is in jail since 16.6.2021 and including the period of

remission he has undergone the jail sentence for more than 7 months' and a

half. He is a young boy of 23 years of age. The fine amount imposed by the

learned trial court has already been deposited, therefore, the sentence of the

appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone.

6. The State has opposed the prayer. Relying on the statement of the

complainant, the learned Panel Lawyer has supported the conviction and

sentence of the appellants.

7. So far as sentence of the appellant is concerned, it is proved that the

incident had taken place on 16.6.2021. Keeping in view the nature of incident

and the manner in which it had happened, the period undergone by him in jail

and also considering that there is nothing against the appellant during this long

span of time, I deem it appropriate to accede the prayer of the learned counsel

to modify the sentence of the appellant.

8. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction of the appellant

under Sections 379 I.P.C is confirmed. However, his sentence is modified to

the extent that the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone along

with the fine of Rs.1000/- to the appellant for his offence. In default he shall

undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month.

9. With the aforesaid modification the appeal is partly allowed and

disposed of.

(Virender Singh) Judge VIVEK

Digitally signed by VIVEK KUMAR TRIPATHI Date: 2022.01.11 10:20:13 +05'30'