Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohammad Fahim Siddiqui vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 26 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2545 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
MOHAMMAD FAHIM SIDDIQUI S/O NAGAR
MOHAMMAD, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, LIG-45 MYAS
COLONY ITARSI DISTT HOSHANGABAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ROHIT SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRO. P.S. AJAK
HOSHANGABAD DISTT HOSHANGABAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI DINESH PATEL - PANEL LAWYER)
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against
the judgment of conviction dated 27/11/2007 passed by the Special Judge
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Hoshangabad in Sessions Trial No.
452/2004, whereby learned Special Judge found the appellant guilty for the
offence punishable under Section 506-II of IPC and directed to suffer R.I. for 1
year with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime was registered against the appellant at Police Station SC/ST, District
Hoshangabad for commission of offence punishable under Section 341, 294,
506-B and section 3 (1)(10) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After
completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
appreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found the appellant
guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 506-II of IPC and
sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved with the impugned
judgment, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up their challenge to
the findings of the Court below so far as is the conviction of the appellant are
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellant accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged the
quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellant is the only
earning person in his family, he is the first offender and counsel assures that he
will not involve in such criminal activities in future. It is also submitted that
having regard to all circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction and
further keeping in view the fact that the appellant was facing the trial since the
year 2004, therefore, he prayed that his jail sentence be reduced suitably.
5. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Courts below have
rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant,
hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire
record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding some
force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
7. Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the finding of
his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the
findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perused
the record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no case
is made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From the
perusal of the record, it reveals that the finding of the trial court is based on
proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence therefore, upheld the
findings of conviction under Section 506-II of IPC recorded by the Court
below.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and
period of jail sentence already undergone by him which is about two days as on
date and the fact that he has no previous criminal antecedents and this matter is
of the year 2004 and looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case,
I am of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met if the
appellant is sentenced for the period already undergone by him with some
enhancement in the fine amount.
9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned conviction
i s hereby maintained. However, the jail sentence imposed on appellant is
reduced to the period already undergone by him and the sentence of fine is
enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of enhanced fine
amount, the appellant shall suffer 1 month R.I. He be released forthwith, subject
to payment of fine and if not required in any other case. Amount of fine, if any,
deposited earlier shall be adjusted.
10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the court below for
information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
V. JUDGE
navin
