Naval Singh vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 5909 MP

                                                           1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT GWALIOR
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                                                ON THE 12 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 641 of 2005

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    NAVAL SINGH S/O DEVI SINGH GURJAR, AGED
                                ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF MADANBASAI
                                P.S. NOORABAD, DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    PANJAB SINGH S/O MANBHAWAN SINGH
                                GURJAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDENT OF
                                GRAM RATE KA PURA ENDORI, DISTRICT BHIND
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    SEWARAM S/O AJMERSINGH CURJAR, AGED
                                ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
                                PIPROLI P.S.JHANSHI ROAD, GWALIOR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....APPELLANTS
                          (SHRI PRADIP KATARE AND SHRI M.L. YADAV, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR
                          THE APPELLANTS NO. 1 AND 3 AND SHRI JAI PRAKASH MISHRA,
                          LEARNED COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT NO.2)

                          AND
                          STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION KOTWALI
                          DISTT. MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENT
                          ( SHRI PAWAN SINGH RAGHUVANSHI- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                          RESPONDENT- STATE)

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

Instant Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of CrPC has been preferred by the appellants challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/13/2023 5:52:00 PM

dated 30-09-2005 passed by Fifth Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Morena in Sessions Trial No.30 of 1998 whereby appellants have been convicted under Section 307 of IPC, Section 25(1-B) and 27(1) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo seven years RI with fine of Rs.500/-, one year RI with fine of Rs.500/- and three years RI with fine of Rs.500/- respectively. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

At the threshold, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that they do not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence has taken place as back as in the year 1997, the appellants are facing judicial proceedings for the last more than 23 years, appellant no.1 has served in

custody a period of 22 months, appellant no.2 Punjab Singh has served in custody a period of 17 months and appellant no.3 Sevaram has served in custody a period of two years, therefore, it is prayed that in lieu of substantive jail sentence awarded to each of appellants for offence under Section 307 of IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by them by enhancing fine amount to the tune of Rs.25,000/-(two counts for causing injuries to both injured) and substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellants for commission of offence under Arms Act may be reduced to one year period already undergone by them.

O n the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the jail sentence awarded to the appellants nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.

It is not in dispute that occurrence has taken place as back as in the year 1997. The appellants are facing judicial proceedings for the last more than 23 years and appellant no.1 has served in custody a period of 22 months, appellant Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/13/2023 5:52:00 PM

no.2 Punjab Singh has served in custody a period of 17 months and appellant no.3 Sevaram has served in custody a period of two years.

Thus, looking to overall circumstances and keeping in view that offence in question was committed nearly 23 years back, it will be just and proper if jail sentence awarded by trial Court for the aforesaid offences is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining appellants' conviction for aforesaid offence under Sections 307 of IPC, substantive jail sentence awarded to each of appellants for offence under Section 307 of IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by them by enhancing the fine amount to the tune of Rs.25,000/-(two counts for causing injuries to both injured) and the enhanced fine amount of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lac fifty thousand) be paid to both injured Shrichand and Lal Singh i.e. Rs.75,000/- be paid to Shrichand and Rs.75,000/- be paid to Lal Singh as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC on adjustment of fine amount as already deposited by appellants before the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. While maintaining conviction under Sections 25(1-B) and 27(1) of Arms Act, substantive jail sentence awarded to appellants under the Arms Act is reduced to one year already undergone by them with the same fine amount as awarded by trial

Court. On failure of deposit of aforesaid enhanced amount before the trial Court within the aforesaid stipulated period, the judgment passed by this Court shall remain lose its effect. Since appellants are on bail, therefore, their bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged.

Let a copy of this judgment along with record be sent to the concerned

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/13/2023 5:52:00 PM

trial Court for information and compliance.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE MKB

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/13/2023 5:52:00 PM