Udaybhan Saket vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 22801 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Udaybhan Saket 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. 588 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           UDAYBHAN SAKET S/O SHRI PARMESHWAR SAKET,
                           AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, NAUGAWNA P.S. AMAR PATAN
                           DISTRICT-SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI AJAY TAMRAKAR-AMICUS CURIAE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH P.S. AMARPATAN
                           SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI G.S. THAKUR-GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                 Th is appeal coming on for hearing. this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                            JUDGMENT

By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Upper Session Judge, Amarpatan District Satna in S.T. No.226/2009 on 22.1.2014 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo one year R.I. and fine of Rs.1000/- and in default, to further undergo one month S.I.

2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Advocate who is present in the Court has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of the appellant as amicus curiae.

3. The learned amicus curiae has submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial, the appellant remained in custody from 17.3.2009 to 4.6.2009. He prayed for acquittal of the appellant.

4. 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 324 of Indian Penal Code.

5. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of record, it appears one Vansroop Saket lodged a report at P.S. Amarpatan

District Satna on 11.3.2009 registered as Crime No.52/2009 against the appellant undere Section 307 of the IPC and after investigation charge sheet was filed. Prosecution examined nine witnesses. PW 4- Vansroop and PW 5-Sunita duly supported the prosecution case and narrated the incident and involvement of the appellant in the offence and their statement were supported by PW 1- Natthu, PW 3-Jugal Kishor, PW 7- Asha Rani. The injury sustained by Sunita were duly explained by PW9-Dr. B.J. Bhadoriya. Learned Sessions Judge after considering the witnesses and the material available on record by judgment dated 22.1.2014 convicted the appellant under Section 324 of the IPC and sentenced as stated herein above. The findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not require any interference of this Court. The judgment of conviction and conviction under Section 324 of the IPC are upheld.

6. However looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2009, the appellant remained in custody from 17.3.2009 to 4.6.2009, the

prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants on

record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of the appellant to the extent of the period which he has already undergone and accordingly, the jail sentence is reduced and the fine amount is maintained. The appellants is on bail, his personal bond and bail bond 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/-