Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vishnu Dwivedi 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. 547 of 2012
BETWEEN:-
VISHNU DWIVEDI S/O KAMLESH PRASAD DWIVEDI,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, VILLAGE KATAULI POST
BHAKHRAWAL P.S. JIYAWAN DISTT. SINGROULI
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI U.K. TRIPATHI - ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THOUGH PLIOCE
STATION VINDHYANAGAR P.S. VINDHYANAGAR DISTT.
SINGROULI
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI DEVENDRA SHUKLA - 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
the judgment of conviction dated 14.2.2012 passed by the Learned Sessions
Judge, Singrauli in S.T.No.109/2011, whereby learned Judge found the appellant
guilty for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the IPC and directed to
suffer R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime No.143/2011 was registered against the appellant at Police Station
Vindyanagar, District Singrauli for commission of offence punishable under
Sections 363 and 365 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 has acquitted the
appellant from the offence punishable under Section 365 of IPC and found him
guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 363 of the 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 person in his family, 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 was facing the trial before the
concerned Court since the date of his incarceration, therefore, he prayed that
his jail sentence 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 have
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 findings of the trial Court is based upon
proper appreciation of oral and document evidence, therefore, upheld the
findings of conviction under Section 363 of the IPC recorded by the trial Court.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant,
natures of the substance, its quantity and period of jail sentence already
undergone by him which is about 10 days and this appeal is pending since 2012
and the appellant is facing trial since 2011, 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 the sentence of fine is
enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of enhanced fine
amount, the appellant shall suffer 3 month R.I. He be released forthwith, subject
to payment of fine and if not required in any other case. Amount of fine, if any,
deposited earlier shall be adjusted.
10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
11. Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the court below
for information and necessary compliance.
12. The enhanced fine amount shall be deposited by the appellant within
a period of one month from today.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
V. JUDGE
sh
