Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pappu @ Sunil And 8 Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 December, 2023
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 27th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 718 of 2013
BETWEEN:-
PAPPU @ SUNIL S/O KAMAL SINGH JATAV, AGED ABOUT 26
1. YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER BALDA COLONY, P.S.
CHHATRIPURA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
JYOTI W/O MUKESH JATAV, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
2. OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE 393 BALDA COLONY P.S.
CHHATRIPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHASHIBAI W/O KAMAL SINGH JATAV, AGED ABOUT 55
3. YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABORER 393 BALDA COLONY P.S.
CHHATRIPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)
RAJKUMAR S/O LALSINGH , AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
4. OCCUPATION: LABORER VILL TILLORE BUJURG P.S.
KHUDEL (MADHYA PRADESH)
MUKESH S/O RAMKARAN JATAV, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
5. OCCUPATION: CARPENTER 389 BALDA COLONY P.S.
CHHATRIPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)
COLLECTOR @ TULSI S/O LALSINGH , AGED ABOUT 25
6. YEARS, OCCUPATION: CARPENTER VILL TILLORE BUJURG
P.S. KHUDEL (MADHYA PRADESH)
LALSINGH S/O GANGARAM JATAV, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
7. OCCUPATION: LABORER VILL TILLORE BUJURG P.S.
KHUDEL (MADHYA PRADESH)
KAMALSINGH S/O GANGARAM JATAV, AGED ABOUT 53
8. YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABORER BALDA COLONY P.S.
CHATRIPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)
SACHIN S/O KAMLA SINGH JATAV, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
9. OCCUPATION: CARPENTER 396 BALDA COLONY P.S.
CHHATRIPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(SHRI ABHAY SARASWAT, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)
2
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH POLICE-STATION SANYOGITAGANJ
DISTRICT-INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI VIRAJ GODHA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court
passed the following:
ORDER
With the consent of counsel for the parties, matter is
finally heard.
(2) This criminal appeal has been filed by appellants under
Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging
judgment dated 29.05.2013 passed by First Additional
Sessions Judge, Indore in Session Trial No.816/2011
convicting and sentencing the appellants as mentioned in
paragraphs 32 to 34 of impugned judgment of trial Court.
(3) Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, has
submitted that he is not challenging the impugned judgment
on merits but he is challenging only the sentence part of
impugned judgment. He further submits that learned trial
Court has convicted the appellants under Section 148, 323 and
324 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. This case relates to incident
dated 21.06.2011. It is also urged that the present incident has
occurred on account of death of appellant's sister - Varsha who
was hospitalized in the MY Hospital, Indore. The appellants
have also remained in custody for a substantial period and
there are no criminal antecedents against them. Hence, in view
of above, appellants may be sentenced with the period already
undergone by them and fine amount may be enhanced.
(4) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State
submits that learned trial Court has rightly convicted and
sentenced the appellants and no interference is called for in
the findings recorded by the trial Court. Hence, appeal be
dismissed.
(5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have
perused the record of the case.
(6) I have gone through the evidence adduced by the
prosecution. A perusal of deposition of prosecution witnesses
Kedar, Rajkumar and Gorelal etc reveals that they have
supported the prosecution case and there are no material
omissions and contradictions and discrepancies in their
statements inter-se and in their court testimonies as well as
police statements. A perusal of FIR Ex.P/1 and deposition of
witness Kedar reveals that FIR has been lodged immediately
on the date of incident and the names of appellants are
mentioned therein. Hence, FIR also corroborates testimony of
Kedar (PW/1). Further, a perusal of medical evidence reveals
that medical evidence also corroborates prosecution
witnesses/prosecution story. There is nothing on record to
show that appellants have been falsely implicated in the
aforesaid offence.
(7) Hence, in view of above, in this Court's considered
opinion learned trial Court has rightly convicted appellants
under Section 148, 324 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
(8) So far as sentence is concerned, learned trial Court has
sentenced appellants as under:-
Conviction Sentence
Section & Act Imprisonment Fine Amount Imprisonment
in lieu of fine
148 IPC 01 year RI Rs.500/- 01 month Addl.
RI
324 IPC 01 year RI Rs.500/- 01 month Addl.
Accused Pappu @ RI
Sunil, Rajkumar &
Sachin.
324/149 IPC 01-01 year RI Rs.500 - 500/- 01-01 months
(2 counts) Addl. RI
323 IPC 03 months RI Rs.500/- 01 month Addl.
Accused Kamal, RI
Lalsingh and Collector
323/149 03 months RI Rs.500/- 01 month Addl.
Accused Pappu @ RI
Sunil, Smt. Jyoti, Smt.
Shashibai, Rajkumar
& Sachin
(9) A perusal of testimony of Gorelal (PW/17) and Ravi
(PW/11) reveals that they have turned hostile. Hence, in view
of facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by
appellants is partly allowed and appellants are sentenced with
the period already undergone and fine amount is enhanced
from Rs.500/- to Rs.1000/- in respect of Section 323 of IPC,
Rs.500/- to Rs.1000/- in respect of Section 148 of IPC and
from Rs.500 to Rs.3000/- in respect of Section 324 of IPC and
in default of payment of fine, one months and three months of
sentence respectively.
(10) Above enhancement of fine is with respect to each
appellant and in relation to the offences for which each
appellant stands convicted. Appellants are directed to deposit
the above enhanced amount within three months from today
and if appellants fail to deposit the aforesaid amount within
the stipulated time, then they shall surrender before the
learned trial Court to undergo sentence of imprisonment as
imposed by the trial Court. Fine amount, if any, already
deposited be adjusted against the enhanced amount.
(11) With the aforesaid, the appeal stands partly allowed to
the extent as indicated herein above.
(12) Certified copy, as per Rules.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
Arun/-
ARUN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE,
2.5.4.20=d5b56e3de75e7828ced1a96bc4f0180
4c3ea1f0a5497e4019e41c0a82cbabbf0,
NAIR
postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
serialNumber=192F2423E128DC1CC004DD8FF
22B3F2FFC3D1EF75981FCBEF3B2B76823F270F
7, cn=ARUN NAIR
Date: 2023.12.28 15:07:35 +05'30'
