Sonu @ Vijay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 22673 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sonu @ Vijay 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 BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                             ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 737 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    SONU @ VIJAY S/O RAJESH SONONE, AGED
                                 ABOUT 23 YEARS, BEHIND RAILWAY STATION
                                 JAWAR P.S. JAWAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    SANJAY S/O BABURAO SONONE, AGED ABOUT 30
                                 YE A R S , BEHIND RAILWAY SATATION, VILL.
                                 JAWAR, P.S. JAWAR, KHANDWA (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    SURESH S/O BABURAO SONONE, AGED ABOUT 37
                                 YE A R S , BEHIND RAILWAY SATATION, VILL.
                                 JAWAR, P.S. JAWAR, KHANDWA (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....APPELLANTS
                           (BY SHRI SUMAN SINGH RAJPUT - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH P.S.               JAWAR
                           KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI AMIT SHARMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )

                                 Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                           following:
                                                          JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (or short "Code") assails the judgment and order dated 17.02.2014 passed passed by the learned Third Addl. Sessions Judge Khandwa (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 121 of 2012 whereby the appellants have been

convicted for the offence under Sections 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.500/- each with default stipulations.

2. The incident relating to marpit, threatening to kill and hurling filthy abuses was reported to the concerned Police Station Jawar District Khandwa (M.P.), was registered on Crime No. 82 of 2012 under Section 294, 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 concerned parties 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 appellants 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. 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 occurred on 29.05.2012 near about more than 11 years back. Appellants have no criminal antecedent. 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, therefore, needs no interference, 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 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 complainant Lakhanlal (PW-1) stands duly corroborated with First Information Report (Ex.P-1) and he medical evidence i.e. MLC report (Ex.P-7). Therefore, it cannot be inferred that the learned trial Court has committed any error in recording conviction for offence under Section 323/34 of IPC against the appellants which is hereby affirmed.

7. As regards the sentence, prayer made on behalf of appellants appears to be reasonable. The incident occurred on 29.05.2012 near about more than 11 years back, which is trivial in nature. No criminal antecedents are attributed to the appellants, therefore, the jail sentence deserves to be set-aside by enhancing the fine amount.

8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed on the point of sentence. The jail sentence of six months for each of the appellants is hereby set-aside and the fine amount of Rs.500/- imposed on each appellants is enhanced to Rs.1000/- each. 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, failing which, they will have to under go simple imprisonment of one month each.

9. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds and personal bonds shall stand 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.

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) V. JUDGE Amitabh