Rajkunwarbai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 20849 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajkunwarbai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 December, 2023

Author: Prem Narayan Singh

Bench: Prem Narayan Singh

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                              ON THE 11 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 882 of 2020

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAJKUNWARBAI W/O CHUNNILAL MEWADA, AGED
                           ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE VILLAGE
                           MAINA P.S. SUSNER (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI MUKESH SINJONIA, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THR.PS. KALAPIPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI RAJESH JOSHI, GA FOR STATE )
                                                       Heard on:07.12.2023
                                                      Delivered on:11.12.2023
                                 This revision petition was heard and the Court pronounced the the
                           following:
                                                               ORDER

With consent of the parties heard finally.

1. This criminal revision under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10.02.2020 passed b y the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Shujalpur District-Shajapur in Criminal Appeal No.32/2018, whereby learned Sessions Judge partly allowed the appeal o f the petitioner by affirming the conviction and reduced the sentence under Section 332 of IPC from three months to 01 month R.I. and enhanced the fine from Rs.500/- to Rs.3000/- passed in the judgment dated 03.01.2018 by the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class in Criminal Case No.68/2016.

2. The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press this revision on merit and nor assailed the finding part of judgment. He confine his argument on the point of sentence only and prays that since the petitioner has already undergone about 10 days of jail incarceration, therefore her sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. It is also submitted that the petitioner has already deposited the fine amount so awarded by the learned trial Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner deserve some leniency as he has already suffered the ordeal of the trial since 2015 i.e. for a

period of 08 years. It is further submitted that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount.

3. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of this revision.

4. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be just and proper.

5. However, the learned trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court has not committed any error in appreciation of evidence available on record. Further, it is found that both the courts below considered the evidence available on record and correctly found that the case of the prosecution is well supported b y the witnesses and medical testimony. Both the Courts below have well considered the material available on record, hence, no infirmity is found in the impugned order of conviction passed by both the Courts below, accordingly,

the same is upheld.

6. So far as the sentence of the petitioner is concerned, after the lapse of almost 08 years, the submissions have been made by the petitioner regarding enhancement fine appear to be proper. The petitioner has suffered the ordeal of criminal case since 2015, this Court finds it expedient to partly allow this revision petition by affirming the conviction of the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the petitioner is hereby reduced to the sentence already undergone by increasing the fine amount from Rs.3000/- to Rs.10000/- under section 332 of IPC to be paid by the petitioner within a period of two months from today.

8. The fine amount, if already deposited shall be adjusted.

9. The bail bond of the petitioner shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount. If the petitioner fail to deposit the fine amount, she will suffer 01 month of simple imprisonment in default.

1 0 . A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE AMIT