Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gyansingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 December, 2023
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1260 of 2013
BETWEEN:-
GYANSINGH S/O BALUSINGH KIRAR, AGED ABOUT 32
YEARS, NAIHEDA, P.S. JEERAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI SHIVENDRA SINGH RAWAT, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH GOVT. THROUGH
P.S. RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. HARSHLATA SONI, PANEL LAWYER)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 374 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and
sentence dated 22.08.2013 passed by the Special Judge [Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act] in Special Sessions Trial
No.50/2012, whereby the appellant has been convicted for commission of
offences punishable under Sections 456 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo 06 months' rigorous imprisonment along with fine of
Rs.1,000/- and 06 months' rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.3,000/-
with default stipulation. The appellant has also been convicted under Sections
323 & 506 and sentenced to fine of Rs.1,000 - 1,000/- with default stipulation.
02. Learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset, submits that he is not
challenging the impugned judgment on merits and is confining his argument to
sentence only.
03. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
04. So far as conviction is concerned is concerned, I have gone through
the evidence adduced by the prosecution and examined it minutely. Perusal of
overall evidence on record reveals that the learned trial Court did not commit
any error in convicting the appellant under Sections 456, 354, 323 & 506 of the
IPC. Hence, findings recorded by the trial with respect to the conviction are
affirmed.
05. So far as sentence is concerned, the trial Court has sentenced the
appellant with 06 months' R.I. along with fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 456
of the IPC and 06 months' R.I. along with fine of Rs.3,000/- under Section 354
of the IPC. The trial Court has sentenced the appellant under Sections 323 &
506 of the IPC with fine only. It is submitted that the incident occurred on
20.02.2012 and there are no criminal antecedents of the appellant. It is also
urged that the appellant has remained in custody from 28.02.2012 to 01.03.2012
and from 27.01.2015 to 25.02.2015. On the above grounds, it is also urged that
the appellant be sentenced with the period already undergone by him and the
fine amount may be enhanced under Sections 456 & 354 of the IPC.
06. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant is
sentenced with the period already undergone by him and the fine amount is
enhanced to Rs.5,000/- under Section 456 of the IPC and Rs.10,000/- under
Section 354 of the IPC and in default, 03 months' R.I. under each sections.
After realization of above fine amount, the prosecutrix be given Rs.15,000/- as
compensation.
07. Appellant is directed to deposit the aforesaid fine amount within a
period of three months from today, failing which he shall surrender before the
trial to undergo the remaining sentence of imprisonment. Fine amount, if any
deposited earlier, shall be adjusted against the enhanced fine amount.
08. In the result, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated
above.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
Ravi
