Ravikant And Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 20767 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ravikant And Ors. 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. 1485 of 2000

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    RAVIKANT SHUKLA, S/O MARIPRASAD SHUKLA,
                                AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O READYMADE
                                GARMENT SHOP, BADA BAZAR, P.S. KOTWALI
                                PANNA (M.P)

                          2.    RAKESH KUMAR S/O PURSHOTTAM LAL
                                AGRAWAL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, READYMADE
                                GARMENT SHOP BADA BAZAR, P.S. KOTWALI ,
                                PANNA. (M.P)

                          3.    PRAMOD KUMAR S/O PANCHAM LAL JAIN, AGED
                                ABOUT 36 YEARS, S.T.D. SHOP BADA BAZAR,
                                PANNA (M.P)

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

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI VIJAY PANDEY - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)

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

This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 (wrongly mentioned as 351) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.05.2000 passed by Special Judge Panna, in S.T. No.17/1997, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 194 of

IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs. 500/- (each) with default stipulations.

2. The counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants do not want to press their conviction recorded by the trial Court, however, it is submitted that the ends of justice would be met, if the jail sentence of the appellants 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 appellants has not pressed upon the conviction of the appellants, therefore, the conviction of the appellants under Section 194 of IPC is hereby affirmed.

5. So far as sentence is concerned, the incident took place 29 years ago, in the considered view of this Court, no fruitful purpose will be served by again sending the appellants to the jail after about 29 years of the incident, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if the jail sentence of the appellants are reduced to the period already undergone and fine amount is enhanced.

6. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellants recorded by the trial Court under Section 194 of IPC is hereby affirmed. The jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone and the fine amount under Section 194 of IPC is enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.1500/- each.

7. The appellants are directed to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court concerned within 45 days from today. The appellants are on bail, their 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 SN