Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramdeen vs State Of M.P. on 26 December, 2023
Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh
Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 26th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.432 OF 2013
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMDEEN, S/O PARVAT LAL, AGED 55 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O GRAM
KALI PAHARI, POLICE STATION- CIVIL LINE,
DISTRICT- DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SHRILAL, S/O NATTHUPAL, AGED 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O GRAM
KALIPAHADI, POLICE STATION- CIVIL LINE
DISTRICT- DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)
........APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI RAMKESH SINGH - ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION-
CIVIL LINE, DISTRICT- DATIA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
........RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI A.K. NIRANKARI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This appeal coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal is pending since 2013. This appeal has been filed by the
appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
22/05/2013 passed by Sessions Judge, Datia, District- Datia (M.P.) in S.T.
No.45/2011, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as
under:-
Section Sentence Fine (Rs.) Default Stipulation
324/149 of IPC 1 Year RI 1000/- 1 Month SI
147 of IPC 3 Months RI 1000/- 1 Month SI
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants remained in
custody 166 and 14 days respectively and incident is of the year 2010 and
more than 13 years have lapsed. Learned counsel for the appellants by not
pressing on conviction confined his argument only to the point of sentence
and prays that the sentence awarded to him be modified to the extent that
period already undergone by them would be sufficient to meet the ends of
justice.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has no objection if the fine
amount is enhanced while reducing the jail sentence of the appellants.
4. Although appeal on merit is not pressed today but in the interest of
justice, record is seen and after going through the record and looking to the
facts conviction is found to be justified, hence, conviction is affirmed and in
the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that while affirming
the conviction of the appellants under Section 324/149 of IPC but conviction
under Section 147 of IPC is kept as it is, jail sentence of the appellants is
reduced to the period already undergone by them which is 166 and 14 days'
respectively but fine amount is enhanced from Rs.1000/- to Rs.3000/- for the
offence 324/149 of IPC which shall be deposited by them within a period of
30 days' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which
the appellants will have to suffer the complete sentence as awarded by the
trial Court. Out of the fine amount deposited by the appellants, Rs.1000/-
additional be given to the complainant- Monu @ Hotam Singh as
compensation. Rest of the amount shall be treated as cost of the prosecution.
5. In view of the above, this appeal is finally disposed of.
6. Let a copy of this order be sent alongwith the record to the concerned
Court for necessary compliance.
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
V. JUDGE
RAHUL Digitally signed by RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT
OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR,
rahul
SINGH
2.5.4.20=eac942476567cd1b39b3da460684034
62fdf82ab676d0cde4dee473fe77953f5,
postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
serialNumber=0275C4F803F94C47998BE5C534
PARIHAR
E21BDED910FD4AB9D159B55575E814D05B2E
ED, cn=RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
Date: 2023.12.28 11:33:59 +05'30'
