Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maharaj Singh 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 PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2460 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. MAHARAJ SINGH S/O HEERA SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
VILLAGE CHANDOLI P.S. BHAGWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. PADAM SINGH S/O PHOOL SINGH, AGED ABOUT
25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O
VILLAGE CHANDOLI, POLICE STATION BHAGWA,
DISTRICT-CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BANDULAL S/O DHOORCHANDRA GHOSHI, AGED
ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O VILLAGE CHANDOLI, POLICE STATION
BHAGWA, DISTRICT-CHHATARPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. CHOTELAL S/O DHOORCHANDRA GHOSHI, AGED
ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O VILLAGE CHANDOLI, POLICE STATION
BHAGWA, DISTRICT-CHHATARPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI R.K. CHATURVEDI - ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER P.S. BHAGWA CHHATARPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI DINESH PATEL - DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR STATE)
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DHEERAJ
PRATAP SINGH
Signing time: 1/9/2024
10:23:11 AM
2
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against
the judgment of conviction dated 03.03.2022 passed by the Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Bijawar District - Chhatarpur in Special Sessions Trial
No.43/2019, whereby learned trial Court found the appellants guilty for the
offence punishable under Section 323 (three counts) (each) of IPC and directed
them to suffer R.I. for 03 months and fine of Rs.500/- (three counts) (each)
respectively with default stipulations.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime was registered against the appellants at Police Station Bhagwa, District
Chhatarpur for commission of offence punishable under Section 323, 294 and
506/34 of the IPC (each). After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has
been filed before the competent Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
appreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found the appellants
guilty for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced them
as mentioned above. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the
appellants have preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants expressly gave up his challenge to
the findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellants is
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellants accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellants, however, he challenged the
quantum of punishment alone. The appellants are the first offender and counsel
assures that they will not involve in such criminal activities in future. Simple
injury has been caused to the complainants. No minimum sentence has been
prescribed under Section 323. It is also submitted that having regard to all
circumstances which resulted in appellants' conviction and further keeping in
view the fact that the appellants are facing the trial since the year 2019 and
appeal is pending since 2022, therefore, it has been prayed that the appellants be
punished with fine only.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below has
rightly found the appellants guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellants,
hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire
record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding some
force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants.
7. Though the appellants have not made any attempt to assail the finding
of their conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the
findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perused
the record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no case
is made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From the
perusal of the record, it reveals that the finding of the trial court is based on
proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence therefore, upheld the
findings of conviction of appellants under Section 323 of IPC recorded by the
Court below.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants,
however, looking to the facts that they are facing the trial since the year 2019,
the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants
on record. No minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 323 of the
IPC, I deem it proper to modify the sentence to the appellants Section 323 of
the IPC (three counts) till rising of the Court and fine of Rs.1000/-. The
enhanced amount of fine deposited by the appellants be paid to the victim as
compensation. The appellants will surrender before the trial Court to undergo
the sentence till rising of the Court and deposit the fine amount within a period
of one month from today. The appellants are on bail, their personal bond and
bail bond be discharged. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.
9. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the court below for
information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
DPS
