Madhya Pradesh High Court
Devi Shankar vs State Of M.P. on 27 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 27 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 376 of 2014
BETWEEN:-
1. DEVI SHANKAR S/O SHRI SHAMBHU DAYAL
BAIRVA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
2. DILKHUSH S/O MANGILAL , AGED ABOUT 21
YEARS,
3. SONNARAYAN S/O MANGILAL BAIRWA, AGED
ABOUT 35 YEARS,
4. RAMLAKHAN @ LAKHAN S/O RAMHET BAIRWA,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
5. BABULAL S/O UNKAR BAIRWA, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS,
ALL R/O GRAM ADWAD,DISTT. SHEOPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI PAWAN VIJAYVARGIYA - ADVOCATE )
AND
STATE OF M.P. TH: P.S. SHEOPUR, DISTRICT SHEOPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. KALPANA PARMAR - PANEL LAWYER )
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Appellants have filed this appeal under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. being
aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28/2/2014
passed by Sessions Judge, Sheopur, District Sheopur, in S.T.NO. 28/2009;
whereby, learned trial Court while acquitting the appellants from charge of
offence under Sections 326, 326/149, 506Part 2 of IPC, convicted them for
offence under Sections 148, 323/149, 324/149 of IPC and sentenced them to
undergo one year RI each for offence under Section 148 of IPC, for offence
under Section 323/149 of IPC, they have been sentenced to undergo three
months RI and for offence under Section 324/149 of IPC, they have been
sentenced to undergo RI for one year each with fine of Rs. 500/- each on three
counts and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months
imprisonment.
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 63 day in case of appellants No. 1,3 and 4, 65 days in case
of appellant No. 2 and 56 days in case of appellant No. 5, fine amount of 100/-
each is imposed for offence under Section 148 of IPC, for offence under
Section 323/149 of IPC, fine amount of Rs. 100/- each is imposed and for
offence under Section 324/149 of IPC, fine amount is enhanced from Rs. 500/-
each (three counts) to Rs. 1,000/- each (three counts) and if fine amount as
imposed by the trial Court has already been deposited by the appellants, same
be adjusted. Out of the total enhanced fine amount of Rs. 8,500/- to be
deposited by the appellants, Rs.2,000/- each be paid to the victims
Parbrahm,Parasram, Kedabai and Kanji as compensation, and if necessary by
summoning them. 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)
JUDGE
JPS/-
