Hemraj vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 22400 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hemraj 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 26 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 992 of 2011

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    HEMRAJ S/O MANGILAL, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
                                 R/O WARD NO.15, POLICE STATION, BADODA,
                                 DISTT. SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    DEENDAYAL S/O PRAMPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 22
                                 YEARS, P.S. BADORA ,DISTT. SHEOPUR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    ROSHAN S/O MANGILAL, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
                                 15, P.S.BADORA ,DISTT. SHEOPUR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....APPELLANTS
                           (BY SHRI TRISHANT MISHRA - ADVOCATE )

                           AND
                           STATE OF M.P. TH:P.S.BADODA, DISTRICT SHEOPUR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SMT. PADAMSHRI AGRAWAL - PANEL LAWYER)

                                 Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                             ORDER

Appellants have filed this appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17/11/2011 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Sheopur, in S. S.T.NO. 10/2011 (SC/ST); whereby, learned trial Court while acquitting the appellants from charge of offence under Section 323/34, 341, 506-B of IPC and Section 3(1)(x)

of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, convicted them for offence under Sections 325/34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo Six months RI each with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one months RI each.

2 . Although this appeal has been filed on merits but today, learned counsel for the appellants pressed the appeal only regarding sentence part is concerned and do not press the conviction part as mentioned above.

3. Learned counsel for the State expressed no objection if the above prayer is allowed.

4 . Although, conviction part of the impugned judgment has not been

pressed on merits but to do substantial justice, judgment of the trial Court is perused, oral and documentary evidence seen and after perusing the judgment as well as the record, this Court is of the view that the trial Court has properly recorded the conviction of the appellants as mentioned hereinabove, hence, their conviction is hereby affirmed; however, regarding quantum of sentence, while reducing the jail sentence to the period already undergone by the appellants which is one day, fine amount is further enhanced from Rs. 1000/- each to Rs. 6,000/- each and if fine amount as imposed by the trial Court has already been deposited by the appellants, same be adjusted. Out of the total fine amount of Rs. 18,000/- to be deposited by the appellants, Rs. 10,000/- be paid to the complainant - Chandar as compensation, and if necessary by summoning him. If appellants deposit fine amount as directed hereinabove within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, as the jail sentence of appellants has already been suspended, their bail bonds shall stand discharged and if they fails to deposit the fine amount, they have to undergo total jail sentence of one month each.

5. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part with the above observations. Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for information.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) V. JUDGE JPS/-