Madhya Pradesh High Court
Halke Kahar 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 PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 27 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1486 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
HALKE KAHAR S/O OMPRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 22
YE A R S , VILL KAHAR MOHALLA DHAUKHEDA PS
BARELI, DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ASHOK KUMAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PS BARELI
DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI R.P. PRAJAPATI - PANEL LAWYER)
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against
t h e judgment of conviction dated 12/06/2015 passed by the III Additional
Sessions Judge, Link Court, Baresi, District Raisen in Special
S.T.No.121/2014, whereby learned Special Judge found the appellant guilty for
the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and directed to suffer R.I. for
four months.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime was registered against the appellant at Police Station Bareli, District
Raisen for commission of offence punishable under Section 354-A, 452, 323,
294 of the IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act. After completion of
investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
appreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found the appellant
guilty for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced him
as mentioned above. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the appellant
has preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up his challenge to
the findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellant is
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellant accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged the
quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellant is the only
earning persons in his family, he is the first offender and counsel assures that
they will not involve in such criminal activities in future. It is also submitted that
having regard to all circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction and
further keeping in view the fact that the appellant is facing the trial since the year
2014 and appeal is pending since 2015, therefore, he prayed that the jail
sentence of appellant be reduced suitably.
5. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below has
rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant,
hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire
record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding some
force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
7. Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the finding of
his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the
findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perused
the record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no case
is made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From the
perusal of the record, it reveals that the finding of the trial court is based on
proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence therefore, upheld the
findings of conviction of appellant under Section 323 of IPC recorded by the
Court below.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and
period of jail sentence already undergone by him which is about 11 days as on
date and the fact that the appellant has no previous criminal antecedents and this
appeal is of the year 2015 and looking to the facts and circumstances of the
present case, I am of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met
if the appellant is sentenced for the period already undergone by him with some
enhancement in the fine amount.
9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned conviction
i s hereby maintained. However, the jail sentence imposed on appellant is
reduced to the period already undergone by him and fine of Rs.1,000/- is
imposed on him, which shall be deposited within one month. In default of
payment of fine amount within the stipulated period, the appellant shall suffer 1
month R.I. Appellant is on bail. His bail bond stands discharged.
10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the court below for
information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
as
