Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nagu Giris vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 March, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
(SINGLE BENCH : HON. Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA)
Criminal Appeal No. 7368 of 2021
(Nagu Giris and others V/s. State of M.P.)
Date: 03.03.2022 :
Shri Makbool Ahmad Mansoori, learned counsel for the
appellant no.4-Suresh.
Shri Vishal Panwar, learned counsel for the appellant no.6-
Kisan.
Shri Mukesh Sharma, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties on I.A.
No.1523/2022 and on I.A. No.2848/2022, which are first
application filed under section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for
suspension of custodial sentence of appellant no.4-Suresh and
appellant no.6.-Kisan.
The appellants have been convicted vide judgment dated
30.11.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagda, in
S.T. No.400146/2009 whereby they have been convicted and
sentenced as follows:-
Convicted U/s Sentenced to Fine/ In default of payment of fine
326/149 of the 7 years R.I. besides fined of Rs.3,000/- in default
IPC whereof further RI of 3 months.
323/149 of the 6 months R.I. besides fined of Rs.500/- in default
IPC (3 counts) whereof further RI of 15 days. (for
each count).
324/149 of the 1 year R.I. besides fined of Rs.1,000/- in default
IPC (1 count) whereof further RI of 1 month.
148 of the IPC 1 year R.I. besides fined of Rs.1,000/- in default
whereof further RI of 1 month.
As per prosecution story, complainant Jagdish lodged an
FIR against the appellants herein, before the police alleging that
in the year 2008, the complainant was getting his house
constructed near the Panchayat Road in Village Nipania. As per
the complainant his uncle Amar Singh and his family members
- : 2 :-
were opposing the construction and wanted the appellants to
construct a gate on the road side. On 25/07/2008, Atmaram
Hakam Singh and Shiv Giri invited the complainant to attend the
meeting in Panchayat to resolve the dispute. The complainant
reached to the panchayat office on 26/07/2008 at 12 o'clock. It is
alleged that accused Amar Singh (now dead) left the meeting and
again came to Panchayat office armed with the deadly weapons
with the co-accused persons Suresh, Jitendera, Kisan, Dilip and
Balwant. Amar Singh was armed with iron pipe and Nagu was
armed with wooden stick. With the common intention they caused
injuries to the complainant Jagdish, Ganesh, Lekhraj, Pyarelal and
Jaswant. It is alleged that the accused Balwant hit the complainant
Jagdish on his hand and back with a stick, accused Jitendra
inflicted injuries by means of sword on the hand of Ganesh and
accused Dilip caused the injury with a stick on the head of
Ganesh, accused Suresh and Kisan injured Lekhraj, Pyarelal and
Jaswant by beating them with sticks. The accused persons also
abused the complainant and the victims and threatened to kill
them.
Learned counsel for the appellants submit that so far the
offence under section 326 of the IPC is concerned this appellants
have been convicted with the aid of section 149 of the IPC.
Learned Trial Court has observed that there was a free fight
between two groups and both the parties came prepared for the
fight. Appellant no.1-Nagu also suffered a grievous injuries
therefore, a cross- FIR was registered in which the witnesses and
the complainant have been convicted for section 307 of the IPC
and against which two criminal appeals i.e. CRA No.7411/2021
and CRA No.7628/2021 are pending before this court. So far the
role attributable to the appellants are concerned they said to have
caused injuries to P.W.-3 Lekhraj, P.W.-4 Pyarelal and P.W.-5
- : 3 :-
Jaswant by means of stick (laathi) and he suffered a fracture in the
finger of left hand for which these appellants have been convicted
under section 324 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo one year
of imprisonment. They are not a hardened criminals. Hence, the
jail sentence of the appellants be suspended.
Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposes
the prayer.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the application for suspension of
custodial sentence moved on behalf of the appellants deserved to
be allowed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.1523/2022 and I.A. No.2848/2022 are
allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing fine amount
and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant no.4-Suresh
Giri and appellant no.6- Kisan Giri in the sum of Rs.40,000/-
(Rupees Forty Thousand only)each with one separate sureties
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court for their appearance before the Court, the execution of
custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final
disposal of this appeal.
I.A. No.1523/2022 and I.A. No.2848/2022 stands disposed
of.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per rules.
( VIVEK RUSIA )
JUDGE
Ajit/-
AJIT Digitally signed by AJIT KAMALASANAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE,
ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE,
KAMALASAN
postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=156c9cedca1b74d671db9f220a5e3ed6cba241effad892107d9
5ef0a1afc55b4,
pseudonym=CFDFD9C36711CA738F527A5D61A1EE901C09EF29,
serialNumber=7F0BEE2D78BD57DA058F3247441C87E7E0817FB61F5E
AN
2ABCAEE63CAAA7B3B9FF, cn=AJIT KAMALASANAN
Date: 2022.03.04 12:09:14 +05'30'
