Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pradeep Singh Thakur 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. 1879 of 2018
BETWEEN:-
1. PRADEEP SINGH THAKUR S/O SHRI UDAISINGH
THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, GAUKHEDI, P.S.
JAVAR, (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SACHIN KUMAR S/O SHRI DILIPSINGH SAINDHO,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, GAUKHEDI, P.S. JAVAR,
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI VIJAY SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S. AJAK
SEHORE SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI DILIP SHRIVASTAVA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
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
the judgment of conviction dated 16.02.2018 passed by the Learned Special
Judge, Sehore in S.C.No.44/2016, whereby learned Judge found the appellants
guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 341 and directed to undergo RI
for one month each with fine of Rs.500/- each, under section 323/34 and
directed to undergo RI for three months each with fine of Rs.500/- each and
under Section 325/34 and directed to undergo RI for one year each with fine of
Rs.4000/- each respectively with default stipulation.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime No.13/2016 was registered against the appellants at Police Station AJAK,
Sehore for commission of offence punishable under Sections 341, 294, 323 or
323/34, 325 or 325/34 and 506 (Part-II) of the IPC and sections 3(1)(10) of the
SC/ST 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 has acquitted the
appellants from the offence punishable under Sections 294 and 506(Part-II) of
IPC and found appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under
Section 341, 323/34 and 325/34 of the IPC and sentenced them as mentioned
above. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the appellants have
preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants expressly gave up their challenge to
the findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellants is
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellants accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellants, however, they challenged
the quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellants are the only
earning persons in their family, it is the first offender and counsel assures that
they will not involve in such criminal activities in future. Learned counsel for the
appellants further submits that this is the first offender and there are no criminal
past of the appellants. They are facing trial since 2016 and the appeal is pending
before the High Court since 2018. Therefore, it has been prayed that the
appellants be punished with fine only.
5. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below have
rightly found the appellants guilty for the aforesaid offence, 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 appellants.
7. Though the appellants have 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 findings of the trial Court is based upon
proper appreciation of oral and document evidence, therefore, upheld the
findings of conviction under Section 341, 323/34, 325 and 325/34 of the IPC
recorded by the trial Court.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants,
however, looking to the facts that the incident is of the year 2016, the
prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants on
record. There is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 323,
341 and 325 of the IPC, I deem it proper to modify the sentence to the
appellants Section 325 and 325/34 of the IPC till rising of the Court and fine of
Rs.7,000/- and in default of fine, they have been directed to undergo one month
RI and further under Section 323 of the IPC till rising of the Court and fine of
Rs.1000/- and under Section 341 till rising of the Court and fine of Rs.500/-.
The enhanced amount of fine deposited by the appellants be paid to the victim
as compensation. The appellants will surrender before the trial Court to undergo
the sentence till rising of the Court and deposit the fine amount within a period
of one month from today. The appellants are on bail, their personal bond and
bail bond be discharged. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.
9. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
10. 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
sh
