Vasu @ Vasid Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 22811 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 22811 MP
Judgement Date : 29 December, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vasu @ Vasid Khan 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 DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
                 ON THE 29 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3735 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
1.    VASU @ VASID KHAN S/O SHRI HANIF KHAN,
      AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDENT OF-NARSINGH
      WARD, KARELI POLICE STATION KARELI
      DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    ARMAN KHAN S/O SHRI AKRAM KHAN, AGED
      ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NARSINGH
      WARD KARELI POLICE STATION KARELI
      DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.    SABBU @ SABIR KHAN S/O SHRI JUMMAN KHAN,
      AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NARSINGH
      WARD KARELI POLICE STATION KARELI
      DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                          .....APPELLANT
(ANKIT CHOPRA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .)

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION KARELI DISTRICT
NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
( NALINI GURUNG - P.L. APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE
GENERAL.)

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

The appellants have preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Judgment passed on 7.2.2023 by Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Narsinghpur in SC ATR. No.95/2017, by which the appellants have been

convicted for offences punishable under Section 324/34 on two counts and sentenced to undergo six months R.I. for each count and fine amount of Rs.1,000/- each ,with default stipulations.

2. The charges against the appellants were for offences punishable under Sections 341, 294, 506 and 324/34 (two counts) of IPC and Section 3(1)

(r)(2 counts) and Section 3(1)(S)and 3(2)(va) of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989, the trial court, after trial, acquitted the appellants from the rest of the charges, but convicted for the offence punishable under section 324 for two counts.

3. Learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellant Vasu was already in custody for 3 days, and Sabbu was in custody for 24 days and

Arman was in custody for 37 days. So the jail sentence of the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone. He has further argued that in the medical examination and ocular evidence, there is contradictory evidence, and the appellants be acquitted of the charge under section 324 of IPC. If Court is not inclined to interfere with the conviction, then the jail sentence be reduced to the period already undergone.

4. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State has argued that the judgment is as per facts and law. No interference is called for.

5. Heard the parties and perused the case record. I have gone through the judgment of the trial court and prosecution evidence on record. From that, I am satisfied that the conviction of the appellants under Section 324 of IPC on two counts is as per law. There is no perversity in the Judgment. Hence, the conviction of the appellants under Section 3234/34 IPC on two counts is affirmed.

6. On the point of sentence, it is to be noted that the appellants are of

22 - 25 years of age. No previous conviction is proved against the appellants. The injury as stated by Dr. M.S. Upadhyay - P.W. -5 were simple and looking to the nature of injury, no purpose would be served to re-sending the appellants to the jail. Hence, the jail sentence under Section 324 of IPC on two counts is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellants. The fine amount is enhanced for each count from Rs.1000-1000/- to Rs.3,000-3,000./- (Rupees Three - Three Thousands) after adjusting the previously deposited fine amounts. Each appellant has to deposit Rs.6,000/- fine amount before the trial court. The appellants shall deposit the fine before the trial court within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this Order. In default, the defaulting appellants shall undergo 4-4 months Simple Imprisonment for each default and the jail sentences shall run consecutively.

7. After the fine amount is deposited before the trial court, the trial court shall pay Rs.2,000/- to the victims P.W-1 -Pankaj Thakur S/o Shriram Thakur, R/o Mahendra Ward, near Shanti Niketean, Kareli, P.S. - Kareli, District Narsnghpur (M.P.) and P.W.-4 - Abhishek Gond S/o Shri Nihal Singh Gond, R/o Mahendra Ward, Kareli, P.S. Kareli, District Narsinghpur (M.P.), as compensation. The order of the trial court regarding the case property is affirmed.

8. With the above modification, the appeal is partly allowed.

9. With the copy of the order of this Court, the record of the trial court be returned back for compliance and necessary action.

(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA) JUDGE nd

Date: 2023.12.30 10:13:18 -08'00'