Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10314 MP
Judgement Date : 6 July, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 6 th OF JULY, 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 592 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
MUNNA @ MUNNALAL S/O S/O SHRI SUNNURAM
D H O B I , AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
LABOUR R/O GRAM SAMAYA DABRA, DISTT. GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI FAISAL ALI SHAH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)
AND
STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION DABRA
DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PRAMOD PACHORI, LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE
STATE)
Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This revision has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 04.07.2007 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge Dabra District Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No.95/2007 affirming the judgment of the JMFC Dabra District Gwalior in Criminal Case No.209/2001 on 13.03.2007 convicting petitioner under Section 304-A of IPC and sentencing him to suffer six months RI with fine of 2000/- with default stipulation.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but he confines his argument to the Signature Not Verified Signed by: YOGENDRA OJHA Signing time: 7/6/2023 5:45:53 PM
quantum of sentence part only. It is contended that since occurrence has taken place in the year 2001, the petitioner has suffered custody of about seventeen days and fine amount has already been deposited by the petitioner, therefore, it is prayed that sentence awarded to the petitioner for the aforesaid offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
On the other hand, State Counsel opposed the contentions of counsel for petitioners and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to petitioners nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment as well as
record.
It is not disputed that occurrence relates to year 2001and fine amount has already been deposited by the petitioner. T h u s , looking to overall circumstances, it will be just and proper if sentence awarded to the petitioner by trial Court for aforesaid offences is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Accordingly, this revision is partly allowed. While maintaining conviction of the petitioner for aforesaid offence, the sentence awarded to the petitioner is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/- from Rs.2000/- in respect of offence under Section 304-A of IPC against the petitioner. The fine amount, if any, deposited by petitioner shall be adjusted in the enhance amount. Two months' time from the date of receipt of copy of this order is hereby granted to the petitioner to deposit the aforesaid fine amount and the same shall be payable to complainant(s) by way of compensation, failing which petitioner shall undergo further one month additional imprisonment. Petitioner is on bail, his Signature Not Verified Signed by: YOGENDRA OJHA Signing time: 7/6/2023 5:45:53 PM
bail bonds stand discharged.
Let a copy of this order along with record of trial Court be sent back forthwith.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ojha
Signature Not Verified Signed by: YOGENDRA OJHA Signing time: 7/6/2023 5:45:53 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!