Rudra Prasad & Ors. vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 5904 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                ON THE 12 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 860 of 2005

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    RUDRA PRASAD & ORS. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    BELENDRA SINGH S/O MOTI SINGH, AGED
                                ABOUT 25 YEARS, ANDHIYARI P.S. LONDI DISTT.
                                CHHARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI DHIRAJ TIWARI - ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF SHRI
                          SIDDHARTH DATT - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI MANOJ SINGH - PANEL LAWYER)

                                This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

This criminal appeal is preferred under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 8.04.2005 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act,1989), Chhatarpur passed in ST No.48/2003 whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 325/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year and fine of Rs.1000/- each.

2. As per the prosecution story, on 18.03.2003 at about 12'0 clock in the day time, complainant Ramlal Ahirwar was sleeping near the house situated near the Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 4/13/2023 6:10:32 PM

well of Ramprasad Prajapati, at that time it is alleged that accused Rudra Prasad, Balendra Singh and deceased accused Rajesh Shukla came over there carrying lathis. Thereafter, it is alleged that they started abusing the complainant. Thereafter, it is alleged that all of them started hurled abused and caused injuries by means of lathi on his hand, right wrist, legs and left hand. In the meanwhile, Ramprasad Prajapati Darbarilal and wife of Ramprasad came over there and they intervened.

3. Thereafter FIR was lodged at Police station Londi vide Ex.P/11 and offence vide crime No.39/2003 u/s 294, 323, 506-II/34 IPC and u/s 3(1)(x) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) were registered against the accused

persons.

4. The prosecution has examined total 8 witnesses namely Dr. M.K. Gupta (PW/1), Dr. J.P. Nayak (PW/2), Ramprasad (PW/3) Kusma Bai (PW/4), Darbarilal (PW/5), Manohar Singh Mandloi SDOP (PW/6), Haresh Mohan Shrivastava, ASI (PW/7) and Ramlal (PW/8).

5. In defence the appellants have examined the witness namely; Shivsingh (DW-1).

6. The appellants were tried and charged under Sections 325/34 of IPC. The learned trial Court, after considering the evidence and material available on record has convicted the appellants, as stated above.

7. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not challenging the finding of conviction recorded by the trial court and his only prayer is that the appellant has already suffered the jail sentence of about 11 days. It is pertinent to note that this appeal is of the year 2005 and after about 18 years, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone, looking to the fact and circumstances of the case. Thus, the ends of Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 4/13/2023 6:10:32 PM

justice would be met if the jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them in lieu of sentence fine amount may be enhanced.

8. Learned Government Advocate for the State has no objection to the same.

9. On perusal of record, it reveals that appellants have been facing criminal proceedings for more than 17 years. Appellants have already suffered the jail sentence of about 11 days. It is pertinent to note that this appeal is of the year 2005 and after about 18 years it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence of the appellant under Section 325/34 of the IPC to the period already undergone by them by enhancing the fine amount of Rs.1000/- to Rs.20,000/- each and out of this enhanced amount Rs.15,000/- shall be paid to the complainant/injured Ramlal as compensation.

10. The appellants are directed to deposit the fine/compensation amount within a period of 60 days from today, failing which, they have to undergo the remaining jail sentence awarded by the trial court.

11. Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed.

12. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds shall remain discharged subject to deposit of enhanced fine amount within stipulated period.

13. Let record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action.

14. Appeal is finally disposed off.

15. Pending I.As if any, shall also stands disposed off.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE DevS Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 4/13/2023 6:10:32 PM

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 4/13/2023 6:10:32 PM