Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sarman Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 February, 2023
Author: Anjuli Palo
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
ON THE 2 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6968 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. SARMAN PATEL S/O CHUTTI PATEL, AGED ABOUT
43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SEETARAM PATEL S/O CHUTTI PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. RAMCHANDRA PATEL S/O MUNNALAL PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA
PRESENT ADDRESS NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI
DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. ROSHAN PATEL S/O CHUTTI PATEL, AGED ABOUT
48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUKHRAM PATEL S/O KOMAL PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. HALLU PATEL S/O CHUTTI PATEL, AGED ABOUT
55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. MUNNALAL PATEL S/O CHUTTI PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
2
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. DINESH PATEL S/O GOUTAM PATEL, AGED ABOUT
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
9. KALU PATEL S/O SITARAM PATEL, AGED ABOUT
48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
10. BHOLE PATEL S/O SITARAM PATEL, AGED ABOUT
41 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O.
VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
11. BABLU PATEL S/O TULSIRAM PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
12. ASHISH PATEL S/O TULSIRAM PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
13. DAMMU PATEL S/O GORELAL PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O. VILLAGE KHAMARIYA PRESENT ADDRESS
NANNI DEORI P.S. KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI ASHISH KUMAR KURMI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION KESHLI DISTT. SAGAR (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY - PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE)
3
(SHRI SUBODH TAMRAKAR - ADVOCATE FOR THE OBJECTOR)
T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.8.2022 passed by
Additional Sessions Judge, Deori, District Sagar, in Sessions Trial No.
400074/2016 whereby appellant Nos. 1 and 3 have been convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 458, 459/34 (on 2 counts), 147, 323/149 (4
counts), 325/149 of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 7 years with fine of
Rs.1000/- each, R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs. 500/- each (on each count),
R.I. for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/- each, R.I. for 3 months with fine of
Rs.1000/- each (on each count) and R.I. for 6 months with fine of Rs.2000/-
each, respectively with default stipulations.
Appellant Nos.2 & 4 to 13 have been convicted for offences punishable
under Sections 147, 323/149 (4 counts), 325/149 of IPC and sentenced to R.I.
for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/- each, R.I. for 3 months with fine of
Rs.1000/- (on each count) and R.I. for 6 months with fine of Rs.2000/- each,
respectively with default stipulations.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has not pressed this appeal on
merit and submitted that during the pendency of this appeal, the parties have
resolved their dispute and entered into a compromise. I.A. Nos.15821/2022 &
15822/2022 have been filed in this regard. In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed
that the appellants may be acquitted on the basis of compromise entered into
between the parties.
3. This Court vide order dated 31.10.2022 directed the parties to appear
personally before Registrar (Judicial-II) for verification of the compromise
entered into between the parties. The compromise has been verified by
Registrar (Judicial-II) vide his report dated 9.11.2022 and it has been observed
that the complainants have expressed that they have voluntarily entered into
compromise with all the appellants/accused persons with free will and volition
and without any threat and inducement from the appellants/accused persons to
settle their dispute.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Since, learned counsel for
the appellants has not pressed this appeal on merit, therefore, the facts of this
case need not to be narrated herein.
5. Appellant Nos. 2 & 4 to 13 have been convicted for offences
punishable under Sections 147, 323/149 (4 counts), 325/149 of IPC. Offences
under Sections 147, 323 of IPC are compoundable and Section 325 of IPC is
compoundable with the permission of the Court, therefore, aforesaid offences
are permitted to be compounded. Appellant Nos. 2 and 4 to 13 are acquitted of
the aforesaid offences. However, Section 149 of IPC is not compoundable,
therefore, it cannot be permitted to be compounded, hence it is hereby
affirmed. However, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties,
the jail sentence of appellant Nos. 2 & 4 to 13 under Section 149 of IPC is
hereby reduced to the period already undergone by them and fine amount is
enhanced under Sections 149 (4 counts) of IPC from Rs. 1000/- to Rs. 2000/-,
in default of payment of fine, R.I. for further 2 months and under Section 149
of IPC from Rs.2000/- to Rs.3000/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for
further 3 months.
6. So far as appellant Nos. 1 & 3 are concerned, they have been
convicted for offences punishable under Sections 458, 459 (2 counts), 147,
323/149 (4 counts), 325/149 of IPC, out of which Sections 147, 323 are
compoundable and offence under Section 325 of IPC is compoundable with
the permission of the Court, therefore, aforesaid offences are permitted to be
compounded. Appellant Nos. 1 and 3 are acquitted of the aforesaid offences.
The offences under Sections 458, 459 (2 counts), 149 are not compoundable,
therefore, they cannot be permitted to be compounded, hence they are hereby
affirmed, however, in view of compromise entered into between the parties, the
jail sentence of appellant Nos. 1 & 3 is reduced to the period already undergone
by them and fine amount is enhanced under Section 458 of IPC from Rs.1000/-
to Rs.1500/- each, in default of payment of fine R.I. for further 1 month and 15
days, under Section 459/34 (2 counts) from Rs.500/- to Rs.1000/- each (on 2
counts), in default of payment of fine, R.I. for further 1 month, under Section
149 (4 counts) from Rs. 1000/- to Rs.2000/- each (on 4 counts), in default of
payment of fine, R.I. for further 2 months and under Section 149 of IPC from
Rs. 2000/- to Rs.3000/- each, in default of payment of fine, R.I for further 3
months.
7. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds and surety bonds shall
stand discharged subject to depositing the enhanced fine amount within 15
days from today.
8. Accordingly, I.A. Nos. 15821/2022 and 15822/2022 stand disposed
of. As a consequence thereof, this appeal also stands disposed of.
9. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for information
and necessary action.
(SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE
PB
PRADYUMNA BARVE
2023.02.03 15:27:41
+05'30'
