Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6613 MP
Judgement Date : 24 April, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 24 th OF APRIL, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 323 of 2011
BETWEEN:-
SHOBHA RAM MODI S/O RAGHURAM MODI, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NEELGAR
CHAURAHA P.S.MAGRONI, TEH.NARWAR, DISTRICT
SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI SUNIL JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT)
AND
M.P.MADHYA KSHETRA VIDHYUT VITRAN CO.LTD.
TH:SHRI NAWAB SINGH BHAGEL JUNIOR ENGINEER
DISTT. SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI RAJENDRA BHARGAVA- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR YTHE
RESPONDENT -MPEB)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Instant Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of CrPC has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13- 04-2011 passed by Special Judge (Electricity), Karera, District Shivpuri in Special Sessions Trial No.242 of 2009, whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 135(1)(B) of Electricity Act and sentenced to undergo one and half year RI with fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further undergo two months' additional rigorous imprisonment.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/24/2023 7:20:39 PM
not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence has taken place as back as in the year 2008 and the appellant- accused has served in custody a period of 16 days out of jail sentence awarded by trial Court and near about 15 years have lapsed, it is further submitted that appellant is a poor person and he has already deposited fine amount of Rs.25,000/-, therefore, it is prayed that sentence awarded to appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded by trial Court to
appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called for.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment passed by the Court below as well as record.
It is not disputed that the occurrence relates to the year 2008 and the appellant has so far served a period of 16 days in custody out of total jail sentence awarded by trial Court and so also, suffered the agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to over-all circumstances and the fact that the offence in question was committed near about 15 years back, it will be just and proper if sentence of one and half year RI awarded by the trial Court for offence under Section 135(1)(B) of Electricity Act is reduced to the period already undergone by appellant.
Accordingly, criminal appeal is partly allowed.While maintaining the appellant's conviction for offence under Section 135(1)(B) of Electricity Act, the sentence awarded to him is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant is on bail, therefore, his bail bonds and surety bonds
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/24/2023 7:20:39 PM
stand discharged.
A copy of this judgment along with the record of the trial Court be sent back forthwith.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE MKB
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 4/24/2023 7:20:39 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!