Laxminarayan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3034 MP

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                              ON THE 20 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1181 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    LAXMINARAYAN S/O RAMPRASAD, AGED ABOUT
                                 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O:
                                 GRAM RICHHDI, THANA KALAPIPAL, DIST.
                                 SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    (DECEASED) SANTOSH S/O KANHAIYALAL, R/O:
                                 GRAM NIWANIYA, THANA BIAORA, DIST.
                                 RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANTS
                           (BY SHRI HIMANSHU JOSHI - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THRU. P. S. BIAORA, DIST. RAJGARH
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI KAPIL MAHANT - PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This revision coming on for directions this day, th e court passed the

                           following:
                                                               ORDER

The applicant has preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short €œ"Cr.P.C.") being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 15.09.2014 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Biaora, District Rajgarh in Criminal Appeal No.267/2011 whereby the judgment dated 17.08.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Biaora, District Rajgarh in Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 21-02-2023 18:25:59

Criminal Case No.884/2007 has been upheld and applicant has been convicted for the offence under Section 325 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short €œ"IPC€Â") and sentenced to undergo 01 year Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- with usual default stipulation. It is also noteworthy that during the pendency of the criminal revision applicant No.2 Santosh died on 26.04.2013, therefore, proceedings against the applicant No.2 is closed.

The prosecution story in brief is that on 14.05.2001, at about 2:30 PM at Village Nivaniya, complainant Ramsingh was sitting at the grocery shop of the Champalal, at that time, applicant No.2 Santosh armed with Farsi and

accused/Laxminarayan armed with stick came there and they started abusing the complainant in filthy language, when the complainant objected then both the accused persons started beating him by using Farsi and the wooden stick, due to which complainant Ramsingh sustained various injuries on his forehead, left knee, thigh, left arm and right hand. Thereafter, complainant Ramsingh lodged an FIR at P.S, Biaora. MLC of the complainant Ramsingh was conducted and during x-ray examination fracture has been found on the patella bone of the left knee. During investigation, wooden stick has been recovered from possession of the present applicant.

After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant/accused before the JMFC, Biaora, who has framed the charges under Sections 294, 323, 506/34 and 325 of the IPC against the applicant. The applicant abjured his guilt and took a plea that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The trial Court after considering the submissions advanced by both the parties and scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record convicted the applicant/accused under Section 325 of IPC, and sentenced him Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 21-02-2023 18:25:59

1 year RI with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stimulation.

Being aggrieved by the said conviction, the applicant has preferred Criminal Appeal before the II ASJ Biaora, but same was also dismissed by uphelding the judgment passed by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and the sentence passed by both the Courts below, the applicant has preferred present criminal revision before this Court.

The applicant has preferred the present revision on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant does not want to press this criminal revision on merits and he is not assailing the conviction part of the judgment but he confined his argument only to the extent of quantum of sentence part. His only prayer is that imprisonment of the applicant be reduced to the period already undergone as the applicant has suffered some period of jail incarceration during the trial as well as during pendency of the appeal. He is regularly marking his presence before the Court. He is poor person and is not having any criminal background. Therefore, his sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the revision and prays for its rejection by submitting that both the Courts below have rightly convicted and sentenced the applicant and the sentence in question is sufficient.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

In view of the submissions made by counsel for applicant, although the conviction has not been challenged, but perusal of the evidence available on record also justifies the judgment of conviction passed by both the Courts below.

So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the submissions made

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 21-02-2023 18:25:59

by the learned counsel for the applicant appears to be just and proper. The applicant remained in custody for a period of more than 1 month during trial as well as during the pendency of the revision. At the time of incident, applicant was young boy of 27 years of age. He is not having any criminal background. He is facing trial since 2001. Therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence awarded to him.

Considering the aforesaid, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of applicant under Sections 325 of IPC from 01 year to the period already undergone by him. The fine amount of Rs.2,000/- imposed by both the Courts below is hereby maintained.

Consequently, the present criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. The applicant is on bail. His bail bond and surety bond stand discharged. The order regarding disposal of the property as pronounced is also affirmed.

Let a copy of this judgment along with record of both the Courts below be sent back to the concerned Courts for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Anushree

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 21-02-2023 18:25:59