Ratan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1303 MP

                                                            1
                            IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                               ON THE 23 rd OF JANUARY, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 441 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RATAN S/O PURCHAND, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CASTE
                           BHEEL RESIDENT OF         DATTIGAON     TEHSIL
                           SARDARPUR DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                           (NONE FOR THE APPLICANT)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THRU. P.S. SARDARPUR DISTRICT DHAR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

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


                                 This revision coming on for direction this day th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                             ORDER

None for the appellant.

Jail incarceration report of applicant has been received from sub jail Sardarpur District Dhar. According to the report applicant has remained in custody for 63 days ( 15.3.2014 to 16.5.2014) and 12 days remission period.

Since last two hearings nobody appeared on behalf of applicant, therefore, Shri Naresh Saraf, Advocate who is present in the Court today, is appointed as counsel for accused/petitioner through Secretary, Legal Services Committee. The committee is directed to pay the fees to Shri Saraf, Advocate Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 16:29:16

accordingly to the Rules.

The applicant has preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short œCr.P.C.) being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 15.3.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sardarpur District Dhar in criminal appeal No. 83/2012 whereby the learned Sessions Court has modified the order dated 3.2.2012 passed by JMFC Sardarpur in criminal case No.1160/2008 and appellant has been convicted under section 325 of India Penal Code 1860 (in short IPC) and sentenced him 6 months RI with fine of Rs. 500/- with usual default stipulation

The prosecution story in brief is that on 15.12.2008 at about 6 pm while complainant was returning from his agricultural field at that time, accused/applicant intercepted him on the way and demanded his money back, when complainant said that he has already paid the entire amount then accused abused him in a filthy language and gave a blow of wooden stick due to which complainant sustained injuries over his wrist, right shoulder and left side of thigh, accused also threatened him for life. Complainant Ratan lodged an FIR at police station Sardarpur. His MLC was conducted by Dr. M.L. Jain (PW-1). According to MLC, and x-ray report, fracture in right forearm has been found. Investigating officer Head constable Nanabai prepared a spot map and arrested the accused and recovered wooden stick from his possession.

After completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the applicant/ accused before the JMFC, Sardarpur who has framed charges under Section 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 16:29:16

scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record convicted the applicant as narrated above.

Being aggrieved by said conviction, the applicant has preferred Criminal Appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge Sardarpur. The same was partly allowed. 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, their 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.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 16:29:16

So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant appears to be just and proper. The applicant remained in custody for 63 days ( 15.3.2014 to 16.5.2014) during trial as well as during the pendency of the appeal. At the time of incident, applicant was aged about 45 years. He is not having any criminal background. He is facing trial since 2008. 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 Section 325 of IPC from 06 months to the period already undergone. The fine amount of Rs.500/- imposed by both the Courts below is hereby affirmed.

Consequently, the present criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above.

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 BDJ

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 16:29:16