Neeraj Parashar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 22799 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Neeraj Parashar 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 VINAY SARAF
                                             ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6403 of 2021

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1. NEERAJ PARASAR S/O RAVISHANKAR PARASAR
                           AGED ABOUT 37 YRS. OCCUPATION- SERVICE;

                           2. BHOLE @ NITIN PARASAR S/O RAVISHANKAR
                           PARASAR AGED ABOUT 32 YRS. OCCUPATION -
                           FARMER;

                           3. NAMAN PARASAR S/O RAVISHANKAR PARASAR
                           AGED ABOUT 30 YRS. OCCUPATION-FARMER
                           ALL ARE RESIDENCE OF P.S. KANJAI TEHSIL
                           GOTEGAON DIST. NARSINGHPUR (M.P.)

                                                                                       .....APPELLANTS
                           (BY SHRI R.K. TIWARI - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH                THRO.    P.S.
                           GOTEGAON DISTT. NARSINGHPUR M.P.

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI Y.D. YADAV- GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                 Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                           following:
                                                          JUDGEMENT

By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Narsinghpur in S.T. No.133/2016 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3-3 months and fine

of Rs.1000-1000/- and in default, to further undergo SI for 15 days.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial, the appellants did not remain in custody. He prayed for acquittal of the appellants.

3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State supported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved the incident and the learned Sessions Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Section 323 of IPC.

5. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of

record, it appears that on the basis of first information report lodged by Pooran Ahirwar at Police Station Gotegaon District Narsingpur, Crime No.444/2016 was registered on 14.6.2016 and after investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the appellants.The prosecution examined eight witnesses. PW.2- Pooranlal, PW 5-Ghanshyam Ahirwar supported the prosecution case and narrated the incident and involvement of the appellants. PW. 6-Dr.S.S. Thakur explained the injuries sustained by Pooran and Ghanshyam. Learned Special Judge after considering the evidence available on record and after considere the defense evidence acquitted the appellants from the charges punishable under Section 341, 294, 506 of the IPC and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, however, convicted under Section 323 of the IPC and sentenced as stated above. After perusal of the record, It appears that the learned Special Judge has duly appreciated the evidence and convicted the appellants under Section 323 of the IPC and there is no ground available to interfere in the same. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 323 of the IPC is upheld.

6. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2016, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellant on record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to set aside the jail sentence of the appellants and accordingly, the jail sentence is set aside and the fine amount is maintained. The appellants are on bail, his personal bonds and bail bonds be discharged. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.

7. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.

(VINAY SARAF) JUDGE P/-