Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilawar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1345 of 2006
BETWEEN:-
1. DILAWAR SINGH S/O MANGU SINGH RAJPUT,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, VILL PACHHAYA
P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN DIST.KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ABHAY SINGH S/O NAYAN SINGH RAJPUT, AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
VILL PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN
DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. INDER SINGH S/O MANOHAR SIGH RAJPUT,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
VILL PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN
DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. AMAR SINGH S/O KARAN SINGH RAJPUT, AGED
ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
VILL PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN
DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. ADHARSINGH S/O DILAWAR SINGH RAJPUT,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CULTIVATOR VILL PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON
MAKHAN DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. KAILASH SINGH S/O RAJ SINGH, AGED ABOUT 45
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILL
PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN
DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. BHAGWAN SINGH S/O DARIYAVSINGH RAJPUT,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURE VILL PACHHAYA P.S.CHHEGAON
MAKHAN DIST.KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
8. LAKHAN SINGH S/O NAIN SINGH CHOUHAN
RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, VILL PACHHAYA
P.S.CHHEGAON MAKHAN DIST.KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 12/28/2023
7:50:54 PM
2
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI L.N. SAKLE - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI AJAY TAMRAKAR - PANEL LAWYER)
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 appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 17.07.2006 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST), Khandwa, in
Special Criminal Case No.20/2003 whereby the appellants have been convicted
under Sections 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for
3 months, under Section 325/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to further undergo
S.I. for 15 days, under Section 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
to undergo R.I. for 3 months.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the
prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During trial,
appellant No.1- Dilawar Singh, appellant No.2- Abhay Singh, appellant No.3-
Inder Singh, appellant No.4- Amar Singh and appellant No.7- Bhagwan Singh
remained in custody from 10.01.2003 to 13.01.2003; appellant No.5- Adhar
Singh remained in custody from 13.01.2003 to 26.02.2003 and appellant No.6-
Kailash Singh, appellant No.8- Lakhan Singh remained in custody from
10.01.2003 to 26.02.2003. He prayed for acquittal of the appellants.
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 Judge has rightly convicted the appellants under
Sections 147, 325/149, 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of
record, it appears that on 09.01.2003, Narayan lodged a report against the
appellants at Police Station- Chhegaon Makhan, District- Khandwa, which was
registered as Crime No.11/2003 under Sections 148, 325/149, 323/149, 506-B
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [hereinafter referred to as
'the Act, 1989']. After investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the
appellants. The prosecution has examined 14 witnesses, whereas the appellants
have examined Krishnakant @ Sunil @ Pappu as defence witness. The learned
Sessions Judge, by judgment dated 17.07.2006, acquitted the appellants from
the charges punishable under Sections 148, 506(Part-II) of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Act, 1989, however, convicted them under
Sections 147, 323/149, 325/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as
stated hereinabove. PW/3- Narayan, PW/4- Meerabai, PW/5- Latabai, PW/6-
Hukum supported the prosecution case and deposed the prosecution story and
proved the involvement of the appellants in the commission of offence. PW/2-
Dr. Azad Jain and PW/14- Dr. Gulab Singh Chouhan explained the injuries
sustained by the victims Narayan, Meerabai and Latabai. The findings of the
learned Special Judge in respect of conviction of the appellants under Section
324 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code are based on due appreciation of evidence
and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the findings recorded by the
learned Special Judge are perverse. The same do not require any interference by
this Court. The judgment of conviction is hereby upheld.
5. However, looking to the facts that the incident is of the year 2003; the
prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedent of the appellants on
record; no minimum sentence is prescribed under Sections 147, 323 or 325 of
the Indian Penal Code; the appellants remained in custody respectively for the
period as mentioned above, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of the
appellants to the extent of the period already undergone by them, accordingly,
the jail sentence is reduced. The fine amount is enhanced from Rs.500/- each to
Rs.5,000/- each. The appellants shall deposit the enhanced fine 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.
6. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.
(VINAY SARAF)
V. JUDGE
Prachi
