Madhya Pradesh High Court
Harendrasingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 December, 2023
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1030 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
1. HARENDRASINGH S/O BHAWANISINGH, RAJPUT
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, GRAM PURAVRAYNA,
THANA NARSINGHGARH, DISTT. RAJGARH
(BIAORA) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NARENDRASINGH S/O HARENDRASINGH
RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, GRAM
PURAWRAYNA, THANA NARSINGHGARH DISTT
RAJGARH BIAORA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(SHRI BHEEMSEN SONI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRU. P.S.
NARSINGHGARH, DISTT. RAJGARH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI SACHIN JAISWAL, LEARNED GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR THE
RESPONDENT/STATE)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
appellants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 13.05.2017, passed by
Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Rajgarh Biaora in Special
Case No.51/2014, whereby the appellants have been convicted for offence
under Section 323 of IPC (4 counts) and sentenced to undergo 1-1 Year S.I.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants at the outset submits that he is not
challenging this appeal on merit and confines his argument on the point of
sentence only. Learned counsel after referring to deposition of Dr. Gaurav
Kumar Tripathi (PW-6) and MLC Ex.P-7 to Ex.P-10 submits that in view of
nature of injuries learned trial Court erred in sentencing the appellants with S.I.
for one year. Hence, sentence of imprisonment be set aside by imposing the
fine amount.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that trial Court has
rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants. Sentence imposed by the trial
Court cannot be said to be excessive or disproportionate to the offence. Hence,
no interference is called for in the findings recorded by the trial Court and
appeal filed by the appellants be dismissed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
5. I have gone though the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Perusal
of the depositions of injured/complainant Bhanwarlal(PW-1), Bhuriyabai (PW-
2), Heerabai (PW-3) and Budhram(PW-4) reveal that they are wholly reliable
witnesses and there are no material contradictions and omissions in their
testimonies and police statements. Further deposition of Bhanwarlal (PW-1) and
FIR Ex.P-2 reveal that there is no undue delay in lodging the FIR. It is also
evident from the evidence on record that injured persons have been examined
on the next date of incident. Thus, testimonies of injured persons stands
corroborated from FIR as well as medical evidence on record. There is nothing
on record to show that appellants have been falsely implicated in the case.
6. Hence in view of above, it cannot be said that trial Court has wrongly
convicted the appellants under Section 323 of IPC (4 counts). Hence, no
interference is called for in the findings recorded by the trial Court.
7. So far as sentence of the appellants is concerned, perusal of
testimony of Dr. Gaurav Kumar Tripathi (PW-6) and medical reports Ex.P-7 to
Ex.P-10 reveal that out of four injured persons one Budhram has sustained mild
swelling below right eye and Bhanwarlal (PW-1), Bhuriyabai (PW-2), Heerabai
(PW-3) have only sustained mild tenderness. Hence, in view of nature of injuries
suffered by the injured persons, sentence of imprisonment appears to be
excessive and disproportionate.
8 . Resultantly, in view of overall facts and circumstances of the case,
the appeal filed by the appellants is partly allowed and sentence of
imprisonment is set aside and each appellant is sentenced with fine amount to
Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 323 of IPC on each count (4 counts) and
in default of payment of fine, one month S.I.on each count.
9. If the fine amount is not paid within three months from today,
appellants shall surrender before the trial Court to undergo the remaining part of
the sentence of imprisonment passed by the trial Court.
8 . Fine amount, if any, already deposited, be adjusted in fine amount
enhanced above.
9. With the aforesaid present appeal stands partly allowed to the extent
indicated above.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
V. JUDGE
RJ
