Idreesh Ahmed vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 11024 MP

                                         1
          IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                AT GWALIOR
                                   BEFORE
                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                               ON THE 17 th OF JULY, 2023
                         CRIMINAL REVISION No. 893 of 2011

         BETWEEN:-
         IDREESH AHMED S/O SIDDIQUE AHMED, AGED ABOUT
         28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O BAJARIYA,
         VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                    .....PETITIONER
         (BY SHRI MUNNA LAL TOMAR- ADVOCATE)

         AND
         STATE OF M.P. TH: P.S.KOTWALI DISTT. VIDISHA
         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                   .....RESPONDENT
         (BY SHRI RAJIV UPADHYAY- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE)

                         CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1041 of 2011

         BETWEEN:-
         MUSTAFA KHAN S/O SIKANDAR KHAN, AGED ABOUT 48
         YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O BADI BAJARIA,
         VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                    .....PETITIONER
         (BY SHRI AMIT LAHOTI- ADVOCATE)

         AND
                 1.SHAHIM D/O SIDDIQU AHED, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
                 R/O BADI BAJARIYA, VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH).
                 2. NAHID BANO W/O SHRI RASHID KHAN AGED ABOUT
                 28 YEARS, R/O BADI BAJARIYA, VIDISHA (MADHYA
                 PRADESH)
Signature Not3.Verified
                     NASRIM BANO W/O SHRI AHSAN KHAN AGED 35
Signed by: MADHU YE A R S R/O BADI BAJARIYA, VIDISHA (MADHYA
SOODAN PRASAD
                 PRADESH).
Signing time: 18-07-2023
10:29:11 AM      4. STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION CITY
                                              2
               KOTWALI, VIDISHA, DISTT. VIDISHA.

                                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
               (BY SHRI MUNNA LAL TOMAR- ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO
               3.
               BY SHRI RAJIV UPADHYAY- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE )

                           Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
               following:
                                                        ORDER

This order shall govern the disposal of both the revisions. Both the revisions have been filed against the judgment dated 3rd October, 2011 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha, in Criminal Appeal No.307/2010.

Criminal Revision No.893/2011 has been filed by the petitioner /accused Idreesh Ahmed for setting aside his conviction under Section 325/34 of IPC while Criminal Revision No.1041/2011 has been filed by complainant Mustafa Khan challenging the said judgment to the extent respondents No.1 to 3 have been given benefit of Probation of Offenders Act.

In brief case of the prosecution is that on 18.5.2009 complainant Mustafa was going to repair tin-shed of his house, at that juncture, petitioner Idreesh threw brick on him and beat him. When wife of the complainant came to save him, then petitioner and respondents No.1 to 3 beat her. Complainant and his wife received various injuries. Wife of the complainant also suffered fracture of ulna bone.

Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused in Criminal Revision No.893/2011 submitted that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioner for the aforesaid offence. As regards sentence, it is submitted by Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD learned counsel for the petitioner that incident took place on 18.5.2009 and Signing time: 18-07-2023 10:29:11 AM

petitioner has been facing agony of trial for the last 14 years. Petitioner has already suffered incarceration of 10 days. Amount of fine has been deposited by him. Therefore, while enhancing the fine amount suitably, sentence of the petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, ends of justice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the petitioner in Criminal Revision No.893/2011 to the period already undergone by him, the fine is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- under Section 325/34 of IPC. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 325/34 of IPC, jail sentence o f the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him and fine amount is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- under Section 325/34 of IPC which shall be deposited by him within a period of two months from today, failing which the petitioner will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the Courts below. The amount of fine so deposited by the petitioner be given to complainant under Section 357 of Cr.P.C. as compensation.

With the aforesaid, Criminal Revision No.893/2011 stands disposed of. As far as Criminal Revision No.1041/2011 filed by the complainant is concerned, learned appellate Court is of the view that Idreesh inflicted Danda blow to the wife of complainant due to which fracture occurred and that respondents No.1 to 3 are women and they are the first offenders, and

therefore, gave benefit of Probation of offenders Act to them. In the considered opinion of this Court, there is no illegality or perversity in such finding of learned appellate Court. Accordingly, Criminal Revision No.1041/2011 stands dismissed.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 18-07-2023 10:29:11 AM

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ms/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 18-07-2023 10:29:11 AM