Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 29 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 711 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
AJAY SINGH S/O SHRI RADHEYSHAM SINGH
KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST, R/O VILL. RANIPURA, P.S. PAWAI,
DISTT. BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRIANAND PUROHIT - ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. INCHARGE
POLICE STATION PAWAI DISTT. BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ATUL SHARMA - PANEL LAWYER)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of
Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 19.05.2017 passed by District
and Sessions Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No.130/2015 whereby the
appellant has been convicted under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo One year rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3000/- and u/s. 452
of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo One year rigorous imprisonment with a
fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submitted that he does not
wish to challenge the conviction of the appellant for the aforesaid offence. It is
submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant that at the time of offence the
accused was of 18 years of age and in a heat of passion the incident has taken
place as no previous enmity is established. As regards sentence, it is submitted
by learned counsel for the appellant that the period already undergone would be
sufficient in the ends of justice as the appellant has already suffered 27 days jail
sentence and he has been facing agony of trial since 2014 for a period of near
about 09 years. It is further submitted that appellant has no previous criminal
antecedents. It is prayed that sentence of the appellant may be reduced to the
period already undergone while enhancing fine amount suitably.
3. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but he
has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the
record, it is found that trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record
and rightly convicted the appellant under Section 324 and 452 of the I.P.C.
hence, conviction of the appellant under Section 324 and 452 of the I.P.C.
needs no interference.
6 . As regards sentence, looking to the facts and circumstances of the
case and evidence on record, in the considered opinion of this Court, ends of
justice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the appellant to the
period already undergone by him, fine amount is enhanced to Rs. 5000/- under
Section 324 of the L.P.C. and Rs. 2000/- u/s. 452 of IPC. Accordingly, while
affirming the conviction of the appellant under Section 435 of the LP.C. jail
sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him
and fine amount is enhanced to Rs. 5000/- under Section 324 of the L.P.C. and
Rs. 2000/- u/s. 452 of IPC. The fine amount already deposited by the appellant
be adjusted against the aforesaid amount of fine. The fine amount shall be
deposited by him within a period of two months from today, failing which the
appellant will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial Court. The
entire amount of the fine deposited by the appellant be paid to the
complainant/injured as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
ar
