Prabhulal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 11506 MP

                                                              1

                           IN THE        HIGH COURT               OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT I N D O R E
                                                         BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA

                                               ON THE 24th OF JULY, 2023

                                          CRIMINAL REVISION No. 59 of 2017

                           BETWEEN:-
                              PRABHULAL S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT
                              45 YEARS, GRAM LALUKHEDI TEH.AND
                           1.
                              THANA NALKHEDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                              BHAGIRATH S/O RUGGA JI, AGED ABOUT 45
                              YEARS, VILLAGE LALUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND
                           2.
                              DISTRICT NALKHEDA, (MADHYA PRADESH)

                              ANDARLAL S/O RUGGAJI, AGED ABOUT 46
                              YEARS, VILLAGE LALUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND
                           3.
                              THAN NALKHEDA, (MADHYA PRADESH)

                              RAMLAL S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT 52
                              YEARS, VILLAGE LALUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND
                           4.
                              THANA NALKHEDA, (MADHYA PRADESH)

                              BANSHILAL S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT
                              38 YEARS, VILLAGE LALUKHEDI, TEHSIL
                           5.
                              AND   THANA    NALKHEDA,   (MADHYA
                              PRADESH)
                                                                                 .....PETITIONER
                           ( BY SHRI NILESH JAGTAP,- ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                           HOUSE     OFFICER  THRU.P.S.NALKHEDA
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                           ( BY MS NISHA JAISWAL PL )
                           _____________________________________________________________________
                                 This revision coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
                           following:



Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 25-07-2023
11:32:04
                                                               2
                                                            ORDER

With the consent of both the parties, matter is heard finally. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by impugned judgment dated 29/12/2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Susner, District Agar in Criminal Appeal No. 49/2014 whereby the judgment dated 31/01/2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Susner, District Agar in Criminal Case No. 565/2008, by which, the petitioners have been convicted under sections 323/34, 325/34 and 341 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three months R.I with fine of Rs. 100/- each; one year R.I with fine of fine of Rs. 200/- each and fine of Rs. 100/- each respectively, has been upheld.

2/ The prosecution story in brief is that on 25/06/2007, complainant Shantibai alongwith Dariyavbai and Himmatbai was returning back to their home, at that time, accused Prabhulal and Banshilal came there armed with wooden sticks and obstructed their way by saying that where are they going. Thereafter, they started abusing them in filthy language by stating that they should not come there. Thereafter, the accused persons attacked upon them by using wooden stick. When Kailash, Bhulibai and Balibai came there to rescue them, the accused persons also attacked upon them, due to which, Shantibai Bhulibai, Kailash and Balibai sustained injuries. The petitioners/accused persons also threatened them for life. MLC of victim persons was also conducted by Dr. Narendra Kumar Patel (PW-9). Victim Shantibai sustained fracture on her right elbow bone. On report by the complainant, the aforesaid offence was registered against the accused persons.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 25-07-2023 11:32:04

3/ After conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the petitioners before the JMFC, Susner who framed the charges under sections 324/34, 325/34. 341, 294, 506-II of IPC. The petitioners / accused persons abjured their guilt and took the plea that they have been falsely been implicated in this matter. The trial Court after scrutinizing evidence available on record and considering the rival submissions made by both the parteis, acquitted the petitioners under section 294, 506-Ii of IPC and convicted them under sections 323/34, 325/34, 341, 506-II of IPC and sentenced them as mentioned hereinabove. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the petitioners/accused persons preferred criminal appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Susner, District Agar, but the same was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, this criminal revision has been preferred before this Court by the petitioners.

4/ The petitioners have preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners did not press this revision on merit and not assailed the finding part of the impugned judgment. He confines his argument on the point of sentence only and prays that since the petitioners remained in jail incarceration from 29/12/2016 to 17/02/2017 and they are facing trial since 2007 i.e. for a period of almost 16 years. Petitioners Prabhulal and Bhagirath are old persons aged about 67 years. Andarlal is 61 years old person; Ramlal is 68 years old person and Banshilal is 54 years old person. Hence, he prays that revision be allowed and the jail sentence awarded to the petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by them by imposing the fine amount.

5/ Learned counsel for the respondent/State on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of this revision.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 25-07-2023 11:32:04

6/ Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be just and proper. Hence, finding force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the fact that the petitioner is facing trial since 2007 i.e. for a period of almost 16 years and has already undergone one month and 20 days jail incarceration, this Court finds it expedient to partly allow this revision petition by affirming the conviction of the petitioners, however, reducing their jail sentence to the period already undergone.

7/ Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed by maintaining the conviction, but reducing the jail sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioners Since the petitioners are already on bail, their bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged.

8/ A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE amol

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 25-07-2023 11:32:04