Manoj Kumar Dixit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 20766 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Manoj Kumar Dixit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 December, 2023

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

                                                             1
                           IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                              ON THE 7 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                              CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 77 of 2001

                          BETWEEN:-
                          MANOJ KUMAR DIXIT S/O PARASHRAM DIXIT, AGED
                          ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION DAIRY FARM, R/O
                          JAWAHAR WARD, BEENA, POLICE STATION BEENA,
                          DISTRICT SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI MANISH DATT - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI ESHAAN DATT
                          - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH SAGAR DISTRICT
                          SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI VIJAY PANDEY - PANEL LAWYER)

                                Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                          following:
                                                            JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.01.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai, Distt. Sagar in S.T. No.3/2000, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 451 of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.2,000/- and under Section 323 of IPC sentenced to R.I. for 3 months, with default stipulation.

2. The counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant does not want to press his conviction recorded by the trial Court, however, it is submitted that

the ends of justice would be met, if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone.

3. The counsel for the State has supported the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.

4. Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the impugned judgment and other material on record, since counsel for the appellant has not pressed upon the conviction of the appellant, therefore, the conviction of the appellant under Section 451 and 323 of IPC is hereby affirmed.

5. So far as sentence is concerned, the incident took place 24 years ago,

in the considered view of this Court, no fruitful purpose will be served by again sending the appellant to the jail after about 24 years of the incident, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone and fine amount is enhanced.

6. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial Court under Section 451 and 323 of IPC is hereby affirmed. The jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone and the fine amount is enhanced from Rs.2000/- to Rs.5,000/-.

7. The appellant is directed to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court concerned within 30 days from today. The appellant is on bail, his bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged subject to deposit of aforesaid fine amount.

8. Record of the trial Court be sent back immediately along with a copy of this judgment for information and necessary action.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE ss