Madhya Pradesh High Court
Radhamohan 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. 5058 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
1. RADHAMOHAN S/O SHRI AJAN PRASAD, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: KARSHI,
2. GIRJA MOHAN S/O AJAN PRASAD, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS,
3. RISHIKANT S/O RADHAMOHAN, AGED ABOUT 26
YEARS,
4. BASANT SINGH S/O SUKHPAL SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 25 YEARS,
ALL R/O GRAM BASANTPURA, P.S. ROUN,
DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI PRASOON MAHESHWARI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE
STATION ROUN, P.S. ROUN, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI GIRRAJ SONI - PANEL LAWYER)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 (2) of
Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.11.2017 passed by Special
Judge (Atrocities), Bhind in Special Case No.40/2015 whereby appellants have
been convicted under Section 452 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year
rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- each, Section 148 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-
each and Section 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months R.I. with
fine of Rs.1000/- each and appellant No.2 Girjamohan and under Section 323 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs.1000/- for causing
injury to Longshri, with default stipulations.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits 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 appellant
No.1 Basant Singh has already suffered 06 days jail sentence and remaining
appellants have already suffered 03 days jail sentence and they have been facing
agony of trial since 2014 for a period of near about 09 years. It is submitted by
learned counsel for the appellants that injured persons suffered simple injuries in
the incident. Therefore, it is prayed that sentence of the appellants may be
reduced to the period already undergone by them while enhancing the fine
amount 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 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 under Sections 452, 148 and 323 of
IPC as stated above, hence, conviction of the appellants for the aforesaid
offences 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 jail sentence of the appellants to the
period already undergone by them, the fine be enhanced to Rs.2000/- under
Section 148 of the I.P.C and Rs. 3000/- under Section 452 of IPC.
Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the appellants under Sections
452, 148, 323 of IPC as aforesaid, jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to
the period already undergone by them and fine amount is enhanced to Rs.2000/-
under Section 148 of the I.P.C and Rs. 3000/- under Section 452 of IPC which
shall be deposited by them within a period of two months from today, failing
which the appellants will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial
Court. The fine sentence under Section 323 of IPC is hereby affirmed. The fine
amount, if any already deposited by the appellants be adjusted against the
aforesaid amount of fine. The entire amount of the fine deposited by the
appellants be paid to the complainant/injured as compensation under Section
357 of Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
Ahmad
