Jai Kishan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 22743 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Jai Kishan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 December, 2023

                                                            1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
                                             ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2982 of 2011

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    JAI KISHAN S/O JAGNNATH LODHI, AGED ABOUT
                                 35    YEARS, VILL. TINSAI P.S. AHMEDPUR
                                 DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    MADHO SINGH S/O MUNSHILAL LODHI, AGED
                                 ABOUT    45   YEARS, TINSAI, P.S.AHMEDPUR,
                                 DIST.SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    ARJUN SINGH S/O MADHO SINGH, AGED ABOUT
                                 21 YEARS, TINSAI, P.S.AHMEDPUR, DIST.SEHORE
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI PRASANNAJEET CHATERJI-AMICUS CURIAE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH P.S. AHMEDPUR
                           SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI AJAY TAMRAKAR-PANEL LAWYER)

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

By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Sessions Judge, Sehore in S.T. No.322/2010 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 325 and 323 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo 6-6 months R.I. to each appellants and fine of

Rs.500-500/- for each offence and in default, to further undergo RI 15 days and 8 days respectively.

2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant, Shri Prasannajeet Chaterji, Advocate who is present in the court, has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of the appellants as amicus curiae.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial, the appellants remained in custody for one day. He prayed for acquittal of the appellants.

4. 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 appellants under Sections 325 and 323 of Indian Penal Code.

5. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of record, it appears that FIR was lodged at P.S. Ahmedpur District Sehore on 6.6.2010 against the appellant and one Pappu @ Sumer by one Ramswaroop Vishwakarma which was registered as Crime No.96/2010 under Sections 323, 325, 294, 506 of the IPC. After investigation, the charge-sheet was filed. However, as the cross case was triable by Sessions Court, therefore, the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The prosecution has examined eight witnesses. PW1-Ramswaroop , PW2-Jamna Prasad, PW3-Takhat Singh supported the prosecution case and narrated the incident and involvement of the appellants. PW5-Dr.H.P. Singh explained the injuries sustained by victim, Jamna Prasad, Ramswaroop and Takhat Singh. PW 4 Dr. Manuhar Saxena deposed that two teeth of Jamna Prasad were missing and one tooth was in half break position.

6. Learned Sessions Judge after considering the statements of the witnesses by judgment dated 13.12.2011 convicted the appellants under Section 325 and 323 (two counts) of the IPC and sentenced as stated herein above, however, acquitted the co-accused Sumer Singh @ Pappu. the findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not require any interference. The judgment of conviction and conviction under Section under 323, 325 of the IPC are upheld.

7. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2010, the appellants remained in custody for some period, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants on record, the cross case arising out of same incident was registered wherein the injuries were sustained by the appellants and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Sections 325 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of the appellants to the extent of the period which they have already undergone and accordingly, the jail sentence is reduced and the fine amount is maintained. The appellants are on bail, their personal bonds and bail bonds be discharged. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.

8. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.

(VINAY SARAF) JUDGE P/-