Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramchandra @ Rama vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1072 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
RAMCHANDRA @ RAMA S/O BADRIDAS BAIRAGI,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, JYOTI NAGAR, P.S. SHAJAPUR,
DISTT. SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ANURAG VYAS , LEARNED COUNSEL THROUGH LEGAL AID.)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THRU. P.S. SHAJAPUR, DISTT. SHAJAPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI ANENDRA SINGH PARIHAR, PANEL LAWYER)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
JUDGEMENT
This Criminal appeal has been filed under section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
being aggrieved by judgement dated 21.07.2016 passed by the Special Judge,
SC/ST (P.A.) Act, 1989, Shajapur in Special/ Case No.67/2012 whereby the
appellants/accused had been convicted under section 323 of the IPC and
sentence to undergo six months.
2. Prosecution story in short is that, appellant/accused Ramchandra
@Rama was tried for the offence punishable under sections 294, 323, 506-B of
the IPC and section 3(1)(10) of the SC/ST (P.A.)Act, 1989 arising out of crime
no.904/2012 registered at police station-Shajapur on the report of Mangilal who
belongs to scheduled caste category in Madhya Pradesh on the allegation that
on 28.10.2012 at 9:30 p.m. when the victim was going to supervise his
construction of his house situated at Radhaswami Ashram, Jyoti Nagar,
Shajapur. The appellant/accused abused in filthy words and called the victim by
his caste name and voluntarily caused injuries and warned that he will kill the
victim in future.
3. The appellant/accused abjured the guilt and prosecution examined
victim Mangilal (P.W.-1) and witnesses Ramesh (P.W.-2), Prakash (P.W.-3),
Lakhan P.W.-4, Shivendra (P.W.-5), Dr. Amit Atare Medical Officer, Shajapur
Hospital Shajapur (P.W.-6), Ram Singh (P.W.-7), S.D.O. Shajapur, Ravi
SDOP (P.W.-8). The trial Court acquitted the appellant/accused from the
charges under sections 294, 506-B of the IPC and section 3(1)(10) of the
SC/ST (P.A.)Act, 1989.
4. Challenging the conviction and sentence, this criminal appeal has been
preferred on the ground that the trial court has ignored the discrepancy in the
statement of the witnesses and committed error in passing the impugned
judgment.
5. Counsel for the respondent/State has supported the conviction and
sentence.
6. Heard Shri Anurag Vyas, advocate appointed through Legal Aid and
perused the record.
7. On appreciation of the evidence of victim Mangilal (P.W.-1) and
Ramesh (P.W.-2) and Medical Officer, Dr. Amit Atre (P.W.-6) and report
(Exhibit-P/7) the trial court has concluded in paragraph 28 of the judgment that
appellant/accused voluntarily caused injuries to the victim Mangilal (P.W.-1).
8. On appreciation of the evidence of Mangilal (P.W.-1), Ramesh (P.W.-
2), Medical Officer, Dr. Amit Atre (P.W.-6) and the defence of
appellant/accused in paragraph-26 of the judgment by the trial court. The
finding of the trial court regarding conviction of appellant/accused is not called
for interference hence, the conviction is affirmed.
9. The trial Court has not recorded cogent reasons in paragraph-33 of the
judgment in not granting the benefit of Probation of Offender Act, 1958 to the
appellant/accused. There is no criminal antecedents of the appellant/accused.
He is facing the trial from 2012. Looking to the nature of the incident, having
regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the character of
appellant/accused as first offender, it is expedient to release him on probation
of good conduct under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
10. The appeal is partly allowed and the finding of the trial court
regarding the sentence is modified and instead of sentencing the
appellant/accused at once it is directed that appellant/accused be released on
bail entering into bond with surety of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) to the satisfaction of the trial court within a period of 90 days to appear
and receive sentence when called upon by the trial Court during a period of 3
years and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behavior.
11. Under Section 5 of Probation Of Offenders Act, 1958 the
appellant/accused shall also pay Rs.4,000/-(Rupees Four Thousand Only) to
injured-Mangilal S/o Kishanlal, R/o-Gram Heerapur Bajja, P.S. Shajapur,
District- Shajapur as compensation for the loss suffered for the commission of
offence. The appellant/accused shall deposit the compensation amount within
90 days failing which the said amount shall be recovered from
appellant/accused in accordance with law. The amount of fine deposited by the
appellant/accused before the trial court shall be adjusted towards in amount of
compensation.
11. With the aforesaid, the criminal appeal is disposed off.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
V. JUDGE
ajit
