Aslam @ Bablu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12983 MP

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                                ON THE 10 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                              CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 293 of 2016

                           BETWEEN:-
                           ASLAM @ BABLU S/O HABIB KHAN, AGED 25 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGE NAHARKHEDA / AT
                           PRESENT CHAMARBARDI AGAR, DISTT. AGAR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI SAIF ALI - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRU. P.S. AGAR,
                           DISTT. SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENT
                           ( BY SHRI SANTOSH THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

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

Although matter is listed today for hearing on IA No. 10521/2023 which

is second application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence of appellant, but both the learned counsel for the parties agree to argue the matter finally. Therefore, IA 10521/2023 is disposed off.

2 / Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant under section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.1.2016 passed in Special ST No. 107/2014 by Special Judge Electricity Act, 2003 Agar District Shajapur whereby the appellant has

Signature Not Verified been convicted for the offence under Section 136 of Electricity Act read with Signed by: BHUNESHWAR DATT Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:17:37

section 379 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to 3 years and 6 months R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.

3 / As per the prosecution story, on 12.7.2014 complainant Ashwini Kumar has filed a report before police station Agar by stating that he is posted as a Junior Engineer in MPEB Rural Agar and on 12.7.2014 at about 9 pm he got information that some unknown miscreants had cut down electricity wires which was fitted for supply of electricity to village Banskhedi and they have stolen nine Gage conductor and broken eight poles which has caused loss of about Rs. 80,000/- to the electricity company. Accordingly Crime No. 405/2014 was registered against unknown persons and during investigation, police

recovered looted property and other articles from possession of appellant and other co-accused persons. Thereafter they have been arrested.

4/ After investigation charge sheet has been filed and trial Court has framed charges under Section 136 of Electricity Act and Section 379 of IPC against the appellant. Appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded complete innocence. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned herein above.

5/ Prosecution has examined as many as ten witnesses but defence did not examine any witness. After completion of trial and on scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record, the trial court has convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences and sentenced him as mentioned herein above. Co-accused Jitendra, Ramjani and Raju have also been convicted for the offences and sentenced 3 years RI with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with usual default stipulation.

5/ Appellant has preferred this appeal on several grounds, but during the course of arguments learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR DATT Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:17:37

does not want to press this appeal on merit and assail the finding portion of the impugned judgment. He has confined his argument to the quantum of sentence part only and his prayer is that the imprisonment of the appellant be reduced to the period already undergone. Hence his jail sentence be reduced to the period already undergone and the fine imposed by the trial Court may be affirmed.

6/ Per contra, learned GA for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of this appeal by submitting that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant and the sentence in question is sufficient.

7 / Heard learned counsel for both the parties and considered their arguments and perused the record as well as evidence produced by both the parties.

8/ In view of the above submission although conviction has not been challenged, but a perusal of the evidence justifies the judgment passed by the trial Court.

9/ Learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant has already suffered jail incarceration from 13.7.2014 to 16.8.2014 and thereafter from 21.1.2016 to 15.2.2016 and from 17.2.2020 till now. He is facing trial since 2014, therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant. Fine amount of Rs.5,000/- imposed by the

trial Court is hereby affirmed.

9/ Consequently, present criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. Appellant is in custody. On depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, appellant be released forthwith if he is not required in any other case.

10/ Disposal of the property shall be as per the order of the trial Court. Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR DATT Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:17:37

11/ Let a copy of this judgment along with the record of the trial Court be sent back to the concerned trial Court for necessary action.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE BDJ

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR DATT Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:17:37