Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh @ Chikna Raghuvanshi 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 PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9816 of 2018
BETWEEN:-
RAJESH @ CHIKNA RAGHUVANSHI S/O LATE
MISHRLAL RAGHUVANSHI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O MAIL DAIRY QUARTER,
INFRONT OF EFFEX COMPANY, POLICE STATION CANT,
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI AMITABH BHARTI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION CANT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI R.P. PRAJAPATI - PANEL LAWYER )
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against
the judgment of conviction dated 12/10/2018 passed by the Sessions Judge,
Jabalpur, District-Jabalpur in Session Trial No.63/2017, whereby learned
Sessions Judge, Jabalpur found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable
under Section 435 of IPC and directed to suffer R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.
1,000/- with default stipulations.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
crime No. 582/2016 was registered against the appellant at Police Station Cant,
Jabalpur, District Jabalpur for commission of offence punishable under Section
435 of the IPC. 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 435 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 in custody
from 23.08.2018 to 12.10.2018 and after pronouncement of judgment he is in
jail since 12.10.2018 to 21.02.2019, he is the first offender and counsel assures
that he 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 2017 and appeal is pending since 2017. He further submits that the financial
condition of the appellant is very poor and is not in a position to engage the
counsel on his own expense and he has been engaged through Legal Aid
Services Committee, 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 435 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 and the fact that the appellant
has no previous criminal antecedents and this appeal is of the year 2018 and
looking to the facts and circumstances of the present cas e, 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.
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. 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)
V. JUDGE
K.S.
