Madhya Pradesh High Court
Radheshyam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5494 of 2018
BETWEEN:-
1. RADHESHYAM S/O SHRI SARVAN LAL SHARMA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, GRAM NREYAKEDI P.S
BAIRAD, DISTT. SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VRINDAVAN S/O SARVAN SHARMA, AGED ABOUT
35 YEARS, VILL. NAREDAKHEDI THANA BAIRAD
SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BANTI S/O SARVAN SHAMRA, AGED ABOUT 30
YEAR S , VILL. NAREDAKHEDI THANA BAIRAD
SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. BRAHMA S/O SARVAN SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 25
YEAR S , VILL. NAREDAKHEDI THANA BAIRAD
SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI O.P. MATHUR - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE
STATION BAIRAD DISTT. SHIVPURI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ATUL SHARMA - PANEL LAWYER )
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 (1) of
Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 13.07.2018 passed by Fourth
Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri in Sessions Trial No.74/2014 whereby the
appellants have been convicted under Sections 324/34 and 323/34 (three
counts) of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo one-one year rigorous
imprisonment and three-three months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.
2000/-2000/- and Rs.1000-1000/-, respectively.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants/accused submitted that he does not
wish to challenge the conviction of the appellants for the aforesaid offence. As
regards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that they
have been facing agony of trial since 2018 for a period of near about 05 years,
therefore their jail sentence may be reduced till rising of the court and
enhancement of fine suitably. It is further submitted that complainant/injured
suffered simple injury in the incident. It is further submitted in a heat of passion
the offence has been caused. Therefore, it is prayed that sentence of the
appellants may be reduced till rising of the Court while enhancing fine suitably.
3. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but he
has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the
record, it is found that trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record
and rightly convicted the appellants u/ss. 324/34 and 323/34 of IPC (three
counts), hence, conviction of the appellants under aforesaid sections needs no
interference.
6 . As regards sentence, looking to the facts and circumstances of the
case and evidence on record, in the considered opinion of this Court, ends of
justice would meet if while reducing the sentence of the appellants till rising of
the Court and enhancing of fine amount of Rs. 4000/- by each accused under
Section 324/34 only. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the
appellants u/ss. 324/34 and 323/34 of IPC (three counts) jail sentence of the
appellants is reduced till rising of the Court by enhancing fine amount of Rs.
4000/- by each accused under Section 324/34 only. The fine amount already
deposited by the appellants be adjusted against the aforesaid amount of fine.
Appellants are directed to remain present before the Trial Court within a period
of 60 days from today to serve the sentence of till rising of the Court and within
the aforesaid period shall also deposit the aforesaid fine amount failing which
the appellants will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial Court. It
is clarified that amount of fine deposited by the appellants be paid to the
complainant/injured persons as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
ar
