Parmanand vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 6056 MP

                                                               1
                           IN     THE       HIGH        COURT OF MADHYA                        PRADESH
                                                          AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                  ON THE 13 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                              CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1404 of 1999

                           BETWEEN:-
                           PARMANAND S/O NARAYAN BHIL AGED 30 YEARS
                           OCC.- TAILORING R/O GRAM DHANI P.S. DHAMNOD
                           DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....APPELLANT
                           (SHRI SHYAMLAL PATIDAR - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION
                           DHAMNOD DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....RESPONDENT
                            (SHRI TARUN PAGARE - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

This is appeal u/S. 374 of the Cr.P.C. arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 25.10.1999 passed by Sessions Judge, Dhar in ST No.309/98 whereby the appellant has been convicted u/S. 498-A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years RI.

Counsel for appellant submits that the appellant has already undergone jail sentence and the incident had taken place in the year 1998. The appellant was on bail during trial and appeal and did not misuse the liberty. He maintained good record and relation with the complainant. No purpose would be served in sending the applicant in jail after such long period. Therefore, the appellant may be sentenced to the period already undergone. Counsel for State do not dispute the aforesaid facts. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the jail sentence of the appellant and the period already undergone by him, I am of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 13/04/2023 5:22:46 PM

opinion that a case is made out for sentencing the appellant to the period already undergone. Further the incident had taken place in the year 1998 and the appellant has maintained good record and did not misuse the liberty. No purpose would be served in sending the appellant in jail after such long period. Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained. The jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him and the fine amount is imposed to Rs.5000/-.The appellant shall deposit the imposed fine amount within the period of two months from today. The bail bonds of the appellant shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount. In case if the appellant fails to deposit the fine amount within the aforesaid period, the appellant shall undergo the remaining jail sentence as per the order of appellate court.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Sourabh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 13/04/2023 5:22:46 PM