Devkaran And Ors. vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 22819 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Devkaran And Ors. vs The State Of M.P. 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. 1725 of 1999

BETWEEN:-
1.    DEVKARAN S/O JAMUNA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT
      35 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST

2.    MOHANLAL S/O JAMUNAPRASAD, AGED ABOUT
      39 YEARS,
      BOTH R/O VILLAGE NIPANIA, POLICE STATION
      MANDI, DISTRICT SEHORE, (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                .....APPELLANTS
(SHAFIQULLAH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS.)

AND
THE STATE OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
( VIVEK LAKHERA -G.A. APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE
GENERAL.)

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

This appeal under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed being aggrieved with the Judgment and sentence passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore, dated 21.6.1999, in S.T. No.150/1998, by which the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months R.I. with the fine amount of Rs.5,000/- each, in default of paying fine, additional R.I. of three months have been imposed.

2. In nut shell, the counsel for the the appellants has argued that the trial court as acquitted the appellants from the charges punishable under section 306 of IPC and in that condition the conviction cannot be sustained as per the Judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in Wasim Vs. State NCT of Delhi reported in AIR 2019 SC 3470. Accordingly he has submitted that if the court affirmes the conviction, then the jail sentence be reduced to the period already undergone.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the State has submitted that the conviction and sentence is as per law. No interference is called for.

4. I have gone through the statement of Ram Singh - P.W.-1, Smt. Mathribai - P.W.-2, Ramkunwar - P.W.-8, Ram Singh Verma - P.W.-10 and Kodarmal - P.W.-14, the facts came on the record that after delivery of children, the family members of the victim were torturing the victim, so that she has left her matrimonial home and was residing in her parental home and she was brought from her parental home on assurance that no cruel treatment will be made with her, and in these circumstances she committed suicide.

5. Looking to the facts and circumstances, the conviction of the appellants is affirmed.

6. On the point of sentence it is to be seen that the offence had taken place in the year 1998 and the appellants were in custody for 31 days and appeal is pending since 1999 for the last 24 years. No purpose would be served by re-sending the appellants to the custody. Hence, looking to the facts and circumstances and nature of offence and the fact that the deceased was married 17-18 years prior to the incident, the jail sentence under Section 498-A is reduced to the period already undergone and fine amount is enhanced from

Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) to Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand). The appellants shall deposit the enhanced fine amount before the trial court within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. In default, each appellant shall undergo S.I. for four months.

6. The order of the trial court regarding property is affirmed.

7. The bail bonds and surety bonds of the appellants are discharged subject to depositing enhanced fine amount.

8. The record of the trial court along with the copy of the order of this Court be returned back.

(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA) JUDGE nd

Date: 2023.12.30 10:09:38 -08'00'