Madhya Pradesh High Court
Imta @ Imtiyaz 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. 6652 of 2019
BETWEEN:-
1. IMTA @ IMTIYAZ S/O MUSTAQ QURASI, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O
RAMESHWAR TEKDA P.S. MOGHAT ROAD
KHANDWA, DISTT. KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ASHFAQ S/O MUSTAKA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOUR RAMESHWAR TEKDA PS
MOGHAT ROAD KHUNDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI ANIL KUMAR TIWARI - ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S. MOGHAT
ROAD POLICE STATION MOGHAT ROAD, DISTT.
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI DINESH PATEL - DEPUTY G.A.)
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against
the judgment of conviction dated 29.07.2019 passed by the Learned Third
Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa in S.T.No.39/2019 whereby learned Judge
found the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 323/34 of
the IPC and directed to undergo till rising of the Court with fine of Rs.1000/-
each, under section 324/34 of the IPC and directed to undergo RI for 6 months
each with fine of Rs.500/- each with default stipulation.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
Crime No.395/2018 was registered against the appellants at Police Station
Moghat Road, Khandwa for commission of offence punishable under Sections
294, 323, 324, 506-II, 34 of the IPC. 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 has acquitted the
appellants from the offence punishable under Sections 294 and 506-II of IPC
and found appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under
Section 323/34 and 324 /34 of the 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 their 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, they challenged
the quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellants are the only
earning persons in their family, it is the first offender and counsel assures that
they will not involve in such criminal activities in future. It is further submitted
that co-accused Reshma has been convicted with till rising of the Court under
Section 324 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2,000/-. Learned counsel for the
appellants further submits that this is the first offender and there are no criminal
past of the appellants. They are facing trial since 2019 and the appeal is pending
before the High Court since 2019. Therefore, it has been prayed that the
appellants be punished with fine only.
5. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below have
rightly found the appellants guilty for the aforesaid offence, 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 his 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 findings of the trial Court is based upon
proper appreciation of oral and document evidence, therefore, sentence passed
by the trial Court u/S.323/34 of IPC has been affirmed.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants,
however, looking to the facts that the incident is of the year 2018, the
prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants on
record. There is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 324
of the IPC, I deem it proper to modify the sentence to the appellants Section
324/34 of the IPC till rising of the Court and fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of
fine, they will suffer to undergo RI for one month. 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 under Section 324/34 of IPC and deposit the fine amount within a
period of one month from receiving certified copy of this order/record. 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.
10. 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)
V. JUDGE
Sateesh
