Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilip Kumar Tiwari 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 BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 11873 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. DILIP KUMAR TIWARI S/O LATE RADHEY SHYAM
TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, G.P. MEMORIAL
SCHOOL KE PASS RANJHI POLICE STATION
RANJHI JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. SARASWATI TIWARI W/O DILIP TIWARI,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O G.P. MEMORIAL
SCHOOL KE PASS RANJHI P.S. RANJHI JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI BALBANT SINGH - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION RANJHI DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ROHINI PRASAD AAHIRWAR S/O TAK SINGH
AHIRWAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, NEAR
G.P.MEMORIAL SCHOOL RANJHI JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. SHANTI TIWARI - PANEL LAWYER )
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
T h is Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (or short "Code") assails the judgment and order dated
09.12.2022 passed passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (PoA) Act,
Jabalpur in SCATR No. 25 of 2015 whereby the appellant has been convicted
for the offences under Sections 452 & 323 read with Section 34 (four counts)
of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and
fine of Rs.500/- and rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of
Rs.500/- respectively with default stipulations.
2. T he incident was reported to the Police Station Ranjhi District Jabalpur
(M.P.) where FIR (Ex.P-1) was registered on Crime No. 668/2014 under
Section 452, 294, 323, 324, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of
SC/St (PoA) Act. The investigation was set in motion and on its completion
charge-sheet was filed. Learned trial Court after hearing the concerned parties
and on due appreciation of the evidence on record vide impugned judgment,
convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned herein above.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants challenging the conviction and sentence
submits that the learned trial Court has failed to notice the serious anomalies,
contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of prosecution witnesses.
He has committed serious error of fact and law in recording the findings of
conviction. Therefore, appellants are entitled for acquittal. In the alternative limb
of prayer, learned counsel for appellants submits that appellants have no
criminal antecedent, the incident took place more than 09 years back. Therefore,
by taking lenient view the jail sentence awarded to the appellants may be
reduced to the period till rising of the Court and the amount of fine may be
enhanced.
4. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State supports the impugned judgment and
prays for dismissal of this appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The evidence adduced in support of the allegation with regard to offence
under Section 452 & 323 read with Section 34 of IPC is found to be clear
cogent and consistent. The same is free from any material infirmity and
anomaly. The testimony of injured witnesses namely Rohani Prasad (PW-2),
Subhash (PW-4) and Bhanu Pratap (PW-10) stands duly corroborated with
First Information Report (Ex.P-1) and also with the he medical evidence i.e.
MLC reports (Ex.P-5, P-6, P-7 & P-8) and X-ray report (P-8). One injured
Nirupa has not been examined but she sustained injuries in the incident which is
fully proved by the statements of other injured eye-witnesses. Therefore, the
findings of conviction cannot be interfered with and is hereby affirmed.
7. As regards the sentence, prayer made on behalf of appellants appears to
be reasonable. The incident took place more than 09 years back. The appellant
faced trial and appeal during these long period of 09 year. No criminal
antecedents are attributed to the appellants, therefore, jail sentence for offence
under Section 323/34 IPC is set-aside and the jail sentence for offence under
Section 452 is reduced till rising of the Court..
8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed on the point of sentence
affirming conviction of the appellants. Jail sentence is modified as mentioned
herein above. The fine amount imposed to the appellants for offence under
Section 452 of IPC is enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.4000/- each and the fine
amount for offence under Section 323/34 IPC (four count) is enhanced from
Rs.500/- (each count) to Rs.1000/- (each count) each. Meaning thereby each
appellants will have to deposit further enhanced amount of fine of Rs.2000/-
with regard to the offence under Section 323/34 IPC and Rs.3500/- for the
offence under Section 452 IPC. The enhanced amount amount of fine will be
deposited by the appellants within a period two months form the date of
judgment of this Court before the learned trial Court, failing which, they will
have to under go simple imprisonment of one month each.
9. The appellants will surrender before the learned trial Court on 19.02.2024
at 11:00 a.m. sharp for serving out the jail sentence till rising of the Court. If
appellants fail to report before learned trial Court on the given date and time for
serving out sentence till rising of the Court, the learned trial Court will be at
liberty to take coercive action to secure the presence of the appellants for
serving out the sentence. The appellants are on bail, their bail bond and personal
bond shall stands discharged.
10. The record of the learned trial Court alongwith the copy of the judgement
be forthwith sent back to the learned trial Court for compliance and necessary
action.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Amitabh
