Sukhram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2608 MP

                                                               1
                           IN      THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                               ON THE 13 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2335 of 2005

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SUKHRAM S/O MANSHARAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
                          OCCUPATION: DRIVER RUDHI SCHOOL ENAR GITTI
                          KHADAN JAWAR PS.NARMADA NAGAR KHANDW
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI BRIJESH MISHRA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE   STATE    OF  MADHYA   PRADESH P.S.
                          NARMADANAGAR DISTT EAST NIMAR KHANDWA
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI PRAMOD CHOUBEY - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                          following:
                                                                ORDER

With the consent of the parties, the appeal is heard finally. This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the appellants being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence arising out of judgment and finding of the Court of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, East Nimad District Khandwa dated 20.10.2005 passed in Sessions Trail No.5/04 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 325 and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and fine of Rs. 400/- under Section 294 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 month and under Section 506- Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 2/14/2023 10:31:34 AM

B of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 month with default stipulation.

2. As per prosecution case, on 27.04.2003, it is alleged by the complainant RadheyShyam Baghel the Assisstant Land Superintendent (Land record) of village Jatam that the appellant had committed maarpeet with him when the camp for rehabilitation was established in Primary School Jattam with the help of ‘Sabbal’, Prahalad Patel (PW/4) and others intervened the incident. On the aforesaid incident the FIR (Exhibit P/6) was lodged by PW/8.

3. The injured was medically examined by Dr. K.S. Sehdev and submitted his report (Exhibit P/10). Dr. Rebrari also examined and submitted his report (Exhibit P/6) and thereafter the offices punishable under Section 323, 333,

353, 294, 506/34 IPC was registered and ‘Tami’ was seized in presence of PW/2 Champalal and Devkaran PW/6 and the challan has been filed in the Court.

4. The learned trial Court below after recording the statement of prosecution witnesses come to the conclusion that the appellant is guilty for the alleged offences and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as above, and acquitted from Section 333 of the IPC.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the incident had taken place on 27.04.2003 and no purpose would be served by sending the appellant jail after a lapse of about 20 years. It is further submitted that the fine amount may be increased in lieu of conviction. It is further submitted that appellant has already undergone jail sentence for for more than 3 months.

6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the same.

7. Considering the aforesaid submissions, while maintaining the conviction under Section 325 of IPC of the appellant, the jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant and the fine amount is enhanced from Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 2/14/2023 10:31:34 AM

Rs.1000/- to Rs.25,000/- for appellant from which the amount of Rs.20,000/- be paid to the injured Radheshyam.

8. The appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced fine amount within a period of 60 days from today, failing which, they have to undergo the sentence awarded by the trial court. The appellants are on bail, their bail bond shall remain discharged subject to deposit of enhanced fine amount within stipulated period.

Let record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action.

Pending I.A., if any, stands closed.

Certified copy, as per rules.

With the aforesaid modification in the sentence, the appeal is disposed off.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE DevS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 2/14/2023 10:31:34 AM