Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pappu @ Premchand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 27 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1073 of 2006
BETWEEN:-
1. PAPPU @ PREMCHAND S/O RAMSINGH YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
MADHOPURA,PS RAIPURA,DISTT PANNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. BHURE @ DILIPCHANDRAMSINGH YADAV, AGED
ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
MADHOPURA,PS RAIPURA,DISTT PANNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI MANISH DATT - SENIOR ADVOCATE )
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GEETESH SINGH THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction dated
25.05.2006 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Panna in Special Case No.44/2005 whereby convicted appellant - Pappu @
Prem Chand under Section 324 and appellant-Bhora @ Dilip under Section
324/34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 6 months and fine of
Rs. 2000/- in default one and a half month R.I.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial,
the appellant remained in custody from 29.08.2005 to 31.08.2005.
3 . Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State
supported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved the
incident and the learned Special Court has rightly convicted the appellants under
Section 324 of Indian Penal Code.
4. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of
record, it appears that on 02.08.2005, a report was lodged by Sila Bai against
the appellants, which was registered as Crime No. 62/2005 at Police Station-
Raipura, District-Panna under Sections 323, 324, 294, 506-B/34 of Indian Penal
Code and under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act. The investigation was
transferred to P.S. Ajak Panna District - Panna. After investigation, charge-sheet
was filed. Prosecution has examined 8 witnesses and however, DW-1 (Genda
Bai) was examined as defence witness. The learned Special Judge considered
the evidence by judgment dated 25.05.2006 and acquitted the appellants from
the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506 (Part-II) and under Section
3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act and convicted appellant Pappu @ Prem Chand under
Section 324 and appellant Bhora @ Dilip under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of
IPC and sentenced as stated hereinabove.
5. PW-1 (Sila Bai) and PW-2 (Bali Ram) duly proved the offence against
the appellant and PW-5 (Dr. M.L. Choudhary) explained the injuries sustained
by Sila Bai. It appears that findings of the learned Special Judge is based on
d u e appreciation of evidence and does not require any interference. The
conviction of the appellants under Sections 324 and 324/34 of IPC are upheld.
6. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year
2005, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the
appellants on record. There is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under
Sections 324 and 324/34 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to reduce the
jail sentence of the appellants to the extent of the period which they have already
undergone and accordingly, the jail sentence is reduced. However, fine is
enhanced from Rs.2000/- to Rs.5000/-. The appellants shall deposit the
enhanced amount within a period of two months from today. The appellants are
on bail, their personal bonds and bail bonds be discharged. Accordingly, the
appeal is partly allowed.
7 . Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the
judgment.
(VINAY SARAF)
JUDGE
Shub
