Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramvilas & Anr vs The State Of M.P. on 6 December, 2023
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
ON THE 6 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2004 of 2001
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMVILAS, S/O BALKISHAN, AGED ABOUT
45 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARKHEDA, TEHSIL
BUDHNI, DISTRICT SEHORE (M.P.).
2. BRIJMOHAN S/O SUGANCHAND, AGED
ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION
AGRICULTURIST, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
BARKHEDA, TEHSIL BUDHNI, DISTRICT
SEHORE (M.P.).
3. SURAJMOHAN, S/O SUGANCHAND, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION
AGRICULTURIST, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
BARKHEDA, P.S., TEHSIL BUDHNI, DISTRICT
SEHORE (M.P.).
4. BHAGWATI BAI, W/O RAMVILAS, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION HOUSEWIFE,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARKHEDA, P.S.
REHTI, TEHSIL BUDHNI, DISTRICT SEHORE
(M.P.).
5. SUSHEELA BAI, W/O SUGANCHAND, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION HOUSEWIFE,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARKHEDA, TEHSIL
BUDHNI, DISTRICT SEHORE (M.P.).
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI NISHANK PAL VERMA - ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHIBA
NARAYAN BISWAL
Signing time: 12/9/2023
10:58:04 AM
2
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR PANDEY - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and the
order of sentence dated 30.11.20221 rendered by Additional Sessions
Judge, Nasrullaganj, District Sehore (M.P.) in S.T. No.126/97 whereby
appellants, namely, Ramvilas, Brijmohan, Surajmohan, Bhagwati Bai and
Susheela Bai have been convicted and sentenced under the following
Sections of IPC:- u/S 148 IPC - RI for 6 months (all appellants); u/S 324
IPC - RI for 1 year and fine of Rs.1,000/- (Brijmohan), u/S. 324/149 IPC -
RI for 1 year and fine of Rs.1,000/- (Ramvilas, Surajmohan, Bhagwati Bai
and Susheela Bai); u/S. 323 IPC - RI for 3 months (Surajmohan,
Bhagwati Bai and Susheela Bai); u/S 323/149 IPC - RI for 3 months
(Ramvilas and Brijmohan); u/S.323 IPC - RI for 3 months (Surajmohan);
u/S 323/149 IPC - RI for 3 months (Ramvilas, Surajmohan, Bhagwati Bai
and Susheel Bai).
2 . Prosecution story found to be proved is that on 16.07.1996 at
about 3:00 p.m., when Chironji Bai (PW-7) along with her son Arjun Singh
(PW -1) and nephew Asharam (PW-5) was involved in weeding in the
agricultural field, the appellants, who were five in number, came to the
spot. Appellant - Brijmohan was carrying Tangia, Surajmohan was
carrying Lathi, Ramvilas was holding Karpa and appellants, namely,
Bhagwati Bai and Susheela Bai wielded Lathis. Appellants assaulted
Chironji Bai. On seeing the assault, Arjun Singh (PW-1) and Asharam
(PW-5) started to flee. Arjun Singh (PW-1) and Asharam (PW-5) were
chased by appellant - Brijmohan and assaulted with Tangia on the armpit,
neck and head. Due to assault, Asharam fell down. Thereafter, appellant -
Surajmohan assaulted the injured with Lathi and Ramvilas with Karpe.
Arjun Singh (PW-1) shouted for intervention but appellants surrounded
him and gave lathi blows and slaps. Kailash and Purushottam came to the
scene of crime and witnessed the same.
3. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed, charges were framed
and appellants were tried, convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.
4. After having gone through the facts, circumstances and evidence
collected, this Court sees no reason to disturb the conviction. More so,
nothing has been pointed out to compel this Court to interfere with the
impugned conviction.
5. After having heard learned counsel for rival parties, having perused
the record, considering the nature of injuries sustained which were simple
in nature, the fact that the incident is nearly 27 years old and also the fact
that all appellants except appellants, namely, Bhagwati Bai and Susheela
Bai have suffered approximately 13 days of incarceration and the
sentences for which they have been found convicted do not prescribe any
minimum punishment, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this appeal
to the extent of though affirming the conviction but reducing the sentence
to the period already undergone by appellants.
6. However, appellants Bhagwati Bai and Susheela Bai have not
suffered any custodial period, therefore, being women they are extended
the benefit of probation u/S.360 of Cr.PC. on their furnishing bail bond
for good conduct before CJM Sehore.
7. Resultantly, the appeal is hereby allowed in part. The conviction
of appellants is hereby affirmed but the sentence is modified to the extent
as indicated hereinabove. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds are
discharged.
(SHEEL NAGU)
JUDGE
Biswal
