Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jagdish And 4 Ors. vs State Bank M.P. 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. 502 of 2011
BETWEEN:-
1. JAGDISH S/O UDAYRAM KOLI, AGED ABOUT 44
YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 30 DASHAHARA
MAIDAN INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NARAYAN S/O UDAIRAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 30, DASHAHARA
MAIDAN, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. PADAM S/O UDAIRAM, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 30, DASHAHARA
MAIDAN, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. LAXMAN S/O UDAIRAM, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 30, DASHAHARA
MAIDAN, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. GOVIND @ GAJJU S/O PADAM, AGED ABOUT 27
YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 30, DASHAHARA
MAIDAN INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(SHRI JAGDISH CHAND DANGI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
APPELLANTS)
AND
STATE OF M.P. THROUGHT P.S. ANNAPURNA INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(MS. MEHUL SHUKLA, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER FOR THE
RESPONDENT/STATE)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
appellants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.03.2011, passed by
learned Fifteenth Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Indore in
S.T.No.231/2010, whereby the appellants have been convicted for offence
under Sections 147, 323/149 (two counts) of IPC and sentenced to 6 months
R.I. each (on each count) with fine of Rs.500/-, Rs.1,000/-, Rs.1,000/- each (on
each count) with default stipulation.
2 . Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, submits that he is
not challenging impugned judgment on merits and is confining his argument on
the point of sentence only.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
4. So far as conviction is concerned, I have gone through the evidence
adduced by the prosecution and perusal of the same reveal that learned trial
court has rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 147, 323/149 of IPC.
Hence, the findings recorded by the trial Court with respect to conviction are
affirmed.
5. So far as sentence is concerned, learned trial Court has sentenced
the appellants under Section 147 of IPC for 6 months R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-
and under Section 323/149 of IPC (2 counts), 6 months R.I. with fine of
Rs.1,000/- each (on each count). Perusal of the judgment dated 06.05.2011
passed in Cr.A.No.457/2011 reveal that in that appeal sentence was modified
and appellants were sentenced with period already undergone and fine amount
was enhanced. Evidently, present appeal and Cr.A.No.457/2011 are cross
appeals. Present appeal relates to the incident dated 24.05.2009.
6. In view of above, the appeal filed by the appellants is partly allowed
and sentence of imprisonment of appellants for offence under Section 147 is set
aside and each appellant is sentenced with fine of Rs.3,000/- under Section 147
of IPC and in default of payment of fine, three months R.I. So far as sentence
in relation to Sections 323, 149 (2 counts) is concerned, the sentence as
imposed by the trial Court shall remain intact.
7 . Appellants are directed to deposit the above fine amount within a
period of three months from today failing which appellants shall surrender
before the trial Court to undergo the remaining sentence of imprisonment
imposed by the trial Court. Fine amount, if any, already deposited, be adjusted
in fine amount enhanced above. It is made clear that benefit of Probation of
Offenders Act is extended to the appellants to the effect that service career of
the appellants will not be adversely affected in any manner.
8. With the aforesaid present appeal stands partly allowed to the extent
indicated above.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
RJ
