Radheshyam vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 2647 MP

                                           1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT GWALIOR
                          BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
               ON THE 13th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
            CRIMINAL REVISION NO.713 OF 2010

       BETWEEN:-

1.     RADHESHYAM S/O S/O BHANWARLAL ,
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
       R/O VILL.SONTHWA, TEH. AND DISTT.
       SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.     BANWARI S/O S/O RADHESHYAM , AGED
       ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: R/O
       VILL.SONTHWA,TEH: & DISTT. SHEOPUR
       (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               ........PETITIONERS
       (BY SHRI PAWAN VIJAYWARGIYA- ADVOCATE)

       AND

       STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH POLICE
       STATION- SHEOPUR THROUGH DISTRICT
       MAGISTRATE     SHEOPUR   (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

                                                               ........RESPONDENT

       (BY SHRI G.P. CHAURASIA- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      ORDER

This revision has been filed by the petitioners against the judgment dated 31.08.2010 passed by Second Additional Sessions

Judge to the court of Additional Judge (Fast Track) Sheopur (M.P.) partly allowing the appeal by affirming the conviction of petitioner No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC reducing the sentence from one year to six months R.I. with fine of Rs.200/- and affirming the conviction of petitioner No.2 for the offence punishable under Section 325 r/w 34 of IPC reducing the sentence from one year to six months R.I. with fine of Rs.200/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that incident is of the year 2005 and more than 17 years have lapsed. Learned counsel for the petitioners confined his argument only to the point of sentence and prays that the sentence awarded to them modified to the extent that period already undergone by them would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State while opposing the petition has submitted that the learned trial Court as well as Appellate Court have arrived on the appropriate findings and rightly passed the impugned judgments of conviction and sentence.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, ends of justice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the petitioners to the period already undergone by them, the fine is enhanced from Rs.200/- to Rs.5000/- for petitioner No.1 for the offence under Section 325 of IPC and fine is enhanced from Rs.200/- to Rs.5000/- for petitioner No.2 for the offence under Section 325/34 of IPC. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the petitioner No.1 under Section 325 of IPC and petitioner No.2 under Section 325/34 of IPC, jail sentence of both the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them but fine amount is enhanced from Rs.200/- to Rs. 5000/- each which shall

be deposited by them within a period of one month from today, failing which the petitioners will have to suffer the complete sentence as awarded by the Courts below. The amount of fine so deposited by the petitioners be given to the complainant under Section 357 of Cr.P.C on due verification of identity of the complainant.

In view of the above, this criminal revision is finally disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE Digitally ojha signed by YOGENDRA OJHA Date:

2023.02.13 19:14:53 +05'30'