Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lok Nath Saket 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 VINAY SARAF
ON THE 28 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2477 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
LOK NATH SAKET S/O KEMLU SAKET, AGED ABOUT 54
YE A R S , GRAM BHAG THAN, BUDHAR, DISTRICT
SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY MS. PAPIYA GHOSH-AMICUS CURIAE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
BUDHAR SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI G.S. THAKUR-GOVT. ADVOCATE)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and
sentence passed by Session Judge, Shahdol in S.T. No.261/2013 on 19.12.2014
whereby the appellant and co-accused person Babbu Singh Gond have been
convicted under Section 323 (two counts) of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo six months RI and fine of Rs.1000 and in default to
further undergo one month RI.
2. Ms. Papiya Ghosh, Advocate present in the Court and she has been
requested to assist the Court as amicus curiae.
2. The learned amicus curiae has submitted that the prosecution failed to
prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial, the appellant did not
remain in custody.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State
supported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved the
incident and the learned sessions Court has rightly convicted the appellant under
Section 323 of Indian Penal Code.
4. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of
record, it appears that the FIR was lodged by one Ram Sharan Choudhary
against the appellant and four other accused persons at P.S. Kathar District-
Shahdol which was registered as Crime No.104/2013 on 18.2.2013 under
Sections 294, 341, 323, 324, 506 and 34 of the IPC and after investigation, the
charge-sheet was filed. The prosecution has examined six witnesses whereas the
defense has not examined anyone. The learned Sessions Judge by judgment
dated 19.12.2014 acquitted the co-accused persons, Chaitanya Singh,
Indrabhan Singh and Jaibhan Singh however convicted the present appellant
and co-accused Babbu Singh Gond under Section 323 (two counts) and
sentenced as stated herein above. The prosecution witness PW 4-Ram Sharan
Saket duly narrated the incident and PW 5- Dev Sharan Choudhary also
narrated the incident and proved the involvement of the present appellant in the
incident, PW6-Gagan Choudhary supported the statement of PWs 4 and 5.
P.W.2-Dr. K.N. Gupta explained the injuries however accepted that the injuries
were simple in nature. The findings recorded by learned sessions Court are
based on due appreciation of evidence. The conviction under Section 323 of
the IPC is upheld.
5. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year
2013, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the
appellants on record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed
under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to set aside the jail
sentence of the appellant and accordingly, the jail sentence is set aside.
However, fine of Rs.1000-1000/- is maintained. The appellant is on bail, his
personal bonds and bail bonds be discharged.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.
7. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the
judgment.
(VINAY SARAF)
V. JUDGE
P/-
