Pappi Khan @ Haddi @ Ayub Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr
2023 Latest Caselaw 22761 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Pappi Khan @ Haddi @ Ayub Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr 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. 470 of 2017

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    PAPPI KHAN @ HADDI @ AYUB KHAN S/O SHRI
                                 MUNNA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O
                                 PURANI ANAJ MANDI KE PICHHE, ISLAMPURA,
                                 DIST. SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    SONA @ SHAFIQ MOHMMAD. S/O NOOR
                                 MOHMMAD., AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O
                                 AGRASEN  COLONY, SHEOPUR   (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    ASFAQ @ KABUTAR S/O MUSTAQ KHAN, AGED
                                 ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O BLOCK COLONY KE
                                 PEECHE, KACHCHI BASTI, SHEOPUR(MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPELLANTS
                           (BY SHRI ANSHU GUPTA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROGH INCHARGE
                           POLICE STATION, P.S. AJAK, DIST. SHEOPUR (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

This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 17.03.2017 passed by the Special Judge (Prevention of Atrocities) Sheopur in Special Session Trial No.200013/2016

whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 324 of I.P.C and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- each, Section 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one month of RI with fine of Rs.100/- each and Section 341 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one month of RI with fine of Rs.100/- each with default stipulations.

2. In brief case of the prosecution case is that on 27.08.2015 at about 9:00 PM, complainant Anil Jatav was going to his home Chenpura from the market in an auto, then accused Asfaq @ Kabutar, Pappi Khan stopped the auto and pulled him out of the auto and beat him along-with auto driver Balram Jatav. When he objected, they abused the complainant and committed marpeet

with him. His sister-in-law Jyoti and his brother-in-law Sonu, who were also traveling in the same auto, saved him. Thereafter accused persons abused him in the name of caste and threatened to kill him. On the report, FIR was registered and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court. Charges were framed against accused persons which they denied and requested for trial. After trial, appellants have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

3. 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 appellants have already suffered 01 day jail sentence and they have been facing agony of trial since 2015 for a period of near about 08 years. It is further submitted that complainant suffered simple injury in the incident. Therefore, it is prayed that sentence of the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone while enhancing the fine amount suitably.

4. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but he

has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. 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 324, 323/34 and 341 of the I.P.C. hence, conviction of the appellants under Sections324, 323/34 and 341 of the I.P.C. needs no interference.

7 . 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 is enhanced to Rs.2500/- under Section 324 of the I.P.C, Rs.1000/- under Section 323/34 of IPC and Rs.1000/- under Section 341 of IPC. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the appellants under Section 324, 323/34 and 341 of the I.P.C. jail sentence o f the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them and fine amount is enhanced to Rs.2500/- under Section 324 of the I.P.C, Rs.1000/- under Section 323/34 of IPC and Rs.1000/- under Section 341 of IPC which shall be deposited by them within a period of three months from today, failing which the appellants will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial Court. 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.

8. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI) JUDGE Monika