Madhya Pradesh High Court
Harimohan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 February, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRR No. 428 of 2023
(HARIMOHAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 02-02-2023
Shri Sushil Goswami- learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri Nirmal Sharma- learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
Heard on admission as well as on IA No. 2289 of 2023.
Aforesaid IA has been filed on behalf of applicants for their release under
the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act.
Instant Criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction and sentence dated 24-01-2023 passed by First Additional Sessions
Judge, Datia in Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2022 partly affirming the impugned
judgment dated 19-07-2022 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhander,
District Datia in Criminal Case No.16 of 2018 by which the applicants have
been convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced
to undergo two-two months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.900/-(on
three counts) with default stipulation.
Allegation against the present applicants is that on 21-10-2017
complainant Mannulal Sharma in front of his chaubtara was sweeping. At that
time, applicant no.4 Maniram Verma came there and told him for deletion of his
name from the report. When complainant refused, he committed marpeet with
him. Applicant No.4 Maniram Verma and applicant No.2 Maithili Verma both
hurled abuses. Applicant No.1 Harimohan Verma and applicant no.2 Maithili
Verma committed marpeet with complainant by means of lathi as a result of
which, he sustained injuries on the right side of his head, near right side of his
eye and back. When the wife of complainant and son Deepak came for rescue,
Maithili and Harimohan Verma also committed marpeet by means of lathi due to
which the son of complainant Deepak sustained injuries on the right hand and
cheek. Applicant No.3 Radha Verma inflicted lathi blow on the head of wife of
complainant. Thereafter, Saurabh Verma and Archana Verma intervened in the
matter. At the time of fleeing away from the spot, accused Maniram threatened
the complainant with dire consequences. On the basis of such report, Crime
No. 183 of 2017 was registered at Police Station Bhander. injured were
medically examined. Matter was investigated. After completion of investigation
and other formalities, charge sheet under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC was
filed before the competent Court from where case was committed to
Magistrate for its trial. The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated
19-07-2022 convicted and sentenced the applicants and same has been partly
affirmed by Appellate Court vide impugned judgment dated 24th of January,
2023.
Learned counsel for the applicants does not intend to either raise a
challenge to the judgment of conviction or argue the matter on merits but
restricts the claim for release on probation in accordance with law to the extent
of concession of probation as the applicants have no previous criminal
antecedents, they are the first offenders, the incident took place all of a sudden
on 21-10-2017 and more than five years have passed, the applicants were on
bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to them, fine amount
has already been deposited by them, therefore, their case ought to have been
given the benefit under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act and the
applicants be released on probation. In support of contentions, learned counsel
for the applicants has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the matter of Rajbir vs. State of Haryana, reported in 1985 (Supp)
Supreme Court Cases 272 and the order dated 27th of January, 2023 passed
by this Court in the matter of Dinesh alias Ghonghe and Others vs. State of
MP in CRR No. 251 of 2023.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State supported the impugned
judgements passed by Courts below and submitted that the applicants are not
entitled to the concession of being released on probation. Hence, prayed for
dismissal of application as well as this revision.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the
record with their able assistance.
As merits of the case are not under challenge, hence, the limited dispute
that arises for consideration before this Court relates to quantum of sentence to
be awarded to the applicants.
On perusal of the impugned judgements as well as materials placed
before the Court below, it is apparent that the applicants have no previous
criminal antecedents, they are the first offenders, the incident took place all of a
sudden on 21-10-2017 and more than five years have passed, the applicants
were on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to them, fine
amount has already been deposited by the applicants, therefore, this Court
thinks it appropriate that the applicants are entitled for benefit under Section 4
of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Taking into account the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well
as the High Court, I deem it appropriate to consider the prayer of the applicants
for grant of probation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as
noticed above and also the fact that the maximum sentence awarded by the
Court below is only for two- two months, I am of the view that the present case
is a proper case where the interest of justice would be well-settled in case the
benefit under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act is extended to the
applicants. As such, while maintaining the conviction of applicants under
Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC, the order of sentence passed by the
Court below and as partly affirmed by the Appellate Court is hereby set aside
and the applicants are ordered to be released on probation on their furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only)
with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned trial
Court/Magistrate. It is directed that during the period of probation, the
applicants shall maintain peace and good behaviour.
IA stands closed. The instant revision is partly allowed at admission
stage in terms as indicated above.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court for information
and compliance.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE
Digitally signed by RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
rahul PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001,
st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=eac942476567cd1b39b3da46068403462fdf8
2ab676d0cde4dee473fe77953f5,
pseudonym=68E0B84BAE73376CD071289B3D9FE728
CE00D487,
serialNumber=0275C4F803F94C47998BE5C534E21BD
ED910FD4AB9D159B55575E814D05B2EED,
cn=RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
Date: 2023.02.03 15:57:59 +05'30'
