Shiv Kumar vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 21011 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shiv Kumar vs The State Of M.P. on 12 December, 2023

                                                              1
                            IN      THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                       BEFORE
                                            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
                                              ON THE 12 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1994 of 2004

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SHIV KUMAR, @ ANNA S/O kUNJU PAPAN, AGED
                           ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION MOTOR MACHANIC
                           R/O AMBEDKAR NAGAR BUDHAR, P.S. BUDHAR,
                           DISTRICT SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                           (NONE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           THROUG THE P.S. BUDHAR, SHAHDOL, (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR JHA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

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

The present appeal has been filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment of conviction dated 13.10.2004 delivered in Sessions Trial No. 167/2004 by the IInd Additional Session Judge, Shahdol whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 324 of IPC (two counts) and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year (two counts) and fine of Rs. 500/- each count with default stipulations.

2. Brief facts as per prosecution are that the complainant along with his wife was having meal in his home. On the date of incident i.e. on .04.05.2004

appellant Shiv Kumar @ Anna called out the complainant and when he came out from his house he hit the complainant with knife in abdomen. Blood started oozing out from the wound. When wife of the complainant came out, she was also hit in left thumb.

3. Charge Sheet was filed under Section 307 and 324 of IPC against the present appellant, but after trial, the trial court has found the offence under Section 324 of IPC to be proved and acquitted the appellant under Section 307 of IPC.

4. Upon perusal of the record, it is seen that injury has been proved by the doctor who deposed as PW/8 and he has deposed that injury was of simple

nature in case of wife of the complainant and as regards complainant, injury was such that the internal organs of the abdomen were not exposed. Other medical witness PW/9 who was surgical specialist have deposed that the injury of complainant was also not life threatening and was simple in nature.

5. The prosecution version is duly supported by the complainant as well as his wife and there is nothing in their statement or in their cross-examination which could demolish prosecution theory. Some of the witnesses turned hostile before the trial court but the evidence of PW/1, PW/2, PW/3 and PW/8 are sufficient to uphold the findings of guilt against the present appellant.

6. The instant case is of the year 2004 and the appellant has suffered investigation, trial and appellate stage since last about 20 years. He has already undergone jail sentence of 1 month 4 days during trial. The long pendency of trial and appeal in the present case is mitigating circumstance to commute the sentence to have already undergone. The appellant has remained on bail during trial and during pendency of the present appeal. There is nothing on record to suggest that he has misused the terms of bail.

7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial court under Section 324 of IPC is hereby affirmed. However, the jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone and the fine amount is enhanced from Rs. 500/- to 10,000/-.

8. Let the fine amount be paid within three months from today, failing which original sentence will come into operation and the appellant will be taken into custody to serve out the remaining jail sentence.

9. Let record of the trial court be sent along with copy of this order for information and necessary action. Bail bonds are discharged.

(VIVEK JAIN) JUDGE MISHRA