Madhya Pradesh High Court
Surendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 December, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 28th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2639 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
1. SURENDRA S/O PARASRAM, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
VILL. DHANKHEDI P.S. MANDIDEEP, RAISEN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. GHANSHYAM S/O MOHABAT SINGH, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
VILLAGE POLAHA PS MANDIDEEP (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. DAYASHANKAR S/O PARASRAM, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
VILL. DHANKHEDI P.S. MANDIDEEP, RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. KALURAM S/O NANHU LAL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
VILL. DHANKHEDI P.S. MANDIDEEP, RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. LEELA KISHAN S/O DDHUNDHA LAL, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS, VILL. DHANKHEDI P.S. MANDIDEEP, RAISEN (M.P.)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI AWADHESH GUPTA - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE
P.S. MANDIDEEP RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS SHAKTI TRIPATHI - PANEL LAWYER )
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
This Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (or short "Code") assails the judgment and order dated
08.09.2016 passed passed by the learned Sessions Judge Raisen (M.P.) in
Sessions Trial No. 100243 of 2013 whereby the appellants have been
convicted and sentenced as under:
Name of Sections Sentence In default of
Accused Fine
Surendra S/o 323 of IPC Rigorous Additional
Parasram (Regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Ramkumar PW- for three Imprisonment
2) months and for one month
fine of
Rs.1000/-
Ghanshya m 326 of IPC Rigorous Additional
S/o Mohabbad (regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Singh Bhagwat Singh for three years Imprisonment
PW-12) and fine of for three
Rs.3000/- months.
Daya Shankar 1 323 of IPC Rigorous Additional
S/o Parasram regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Vimla Bai for three Imprisonment
(PW-6) months and for one month
fine of
Rs.1000/-
2 325 of IPC Rigorous Additional
(regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Nirmalal Bai for six months Imprisonment
PW-10) and fine of for two month
Rs.1500/-
Leela Kishan 1 323 of IPC Rigorous Additional
S/o regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Dhundhalal Vimla Bai for three Imprisonment
(PW-6) months and for one month
fine of
Rs.1000/-
2 325 of IPC Rigorous Additional
(regarding Imprisonment Rigorous
Nirmalal Bai for six months Imprisonment
PW-10) and fine of for two month
Rs.1500/-
Kalu Ram S/o 324 of IPC Rigorous Additional
Nanhulal regarding Chain Imprisonment Rigorous
Singh PW-8 for one years Imprisonment
and fine of for one month.
Rs.1000/-
2. The incident relating to various offences rioting armed with deadly
weapons, causing grievous and simple injuries to the injured persons in
furtherance of common object of unlawful assembly was reported to the
Police Station Mandideep and (FIR Ex.P-18) was registered on Crime No.
315/2013 under Section 307, 452, 323, 506 read with 34 of IPC. The
investigation was set in motion and on its completion charge-sheet was
filed. Learned trial Court after hearing the parties concerned and on due
appreciation of the evidence on record vide impugned judgment, convicted
and sentenced the appellants as mentioned herein above.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant challenging the conviction and
sentence submits that the learned trial Court has failed to notice the serious
anomalies, contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of
prosecution witnesses and also ignored the defence advanced by the
appellants. He has committed serious error of fact and law in recording the
findings of conviction. Therefore, appellants are entitled for acquittal. In
the alternative limb of prayer, learned counsel for appellants submits that
the incident was not pre-meditated and it took place on 06.06.2013 near
about more than 10 years back. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.
Appellants Surendra, Ghanshyam and Dayashankar remained in judicial
custody for 18 days , appellant Kaluram for four days and appellant Leela
Kishan remained in judicial custody for two days. Therefore, he prays for
setting aside the conviction by enhancing the fine amount.
4. Learned Government Advocate for the State oppose the prayer stating
that the impugned judgment is based on on due appreciation on evidence
available on record, the appellants armed with deadly weapons constituted
unlawful assembly and caused grievous injuries to Ramkumar, Bhagwat
Singh, Vimla Bai, Nirmalabai and Chain Singh, therefore, needs no
interference in this appeal. The appeal is devoid of merits and deserves to
be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The evidence adduced in support of the allegation with regard to
offence under Section 323 324, 325 & 326 read with Section 34 of IPC is
found to be clear cogent and consistent. The same is free from any material
infirmity and anomaly. The testimony of injured persons is duly
corroborated with the FIR (Ex.P-18), MLC report and X-ray report.
Therefore, it cannot be inferred that the learned trial Court has committed
any error in recording conviction for offence as mentioned herein above,
against the appellants which is hereby affirmed.
7. As regards the sentence, prayer made on behalf of appellants appears
to be reasonable. The incident took place more than a decade back. No
criminal antecedents are attributed to the appellants, and the appellants
Surendra, Ghanshyam and Dayashankar remained in judicial custody for
18 days , appellant Kaluram for four days and appellant Leela Kishan
remained in judicial custody for two days therefore, the jail sentences
deserves to be reduced for the period already undergone by enhancing the
fine amount.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed on the point of sentence.
The conviction of appellants is maintained. The jail sentence of the
appellants is reduced for the period already undergone by them. The fine
imposed on the appellants for the offences under Section 326 IPC is
enhanced from Rs.3000/- to Rs.20,000/-, fine amount for offence under
Section 325 IPC is enhanced from Rs.1500/- to Rs.5000/- and for offence
under Section 323 IPC the fine is enhanced from Rs.1000/- to 3000/-. The
enhanced amount amount of fine will be deposited by the appellants within
a period two months form the date of judgment of this Court before the
learned trial Court, failing which, they will have to under go rigorous
imprisonment for six month each.
9. Out of the fine amount, if so deposited or recovered, the injured
Bhagwat Singh (PW-12) will be compensated by Rs.10,000/-. The
appellants are on bail, their bail bonds and sureties bond shall stands
discharged.
10. The record of the learned trial Court alongwith the copy of the
judgement be forthwith sent back to the learned trial Court for compliance
and necessary action.
RANA V. JUDGE
Date: 2024.01.12 12:13:48 +05'30'
Amitabh
