Dholu @ Chandrabhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 8821 MP

 CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 1812/2023                                                      1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                    AT GWALIOR
                                      BEFORE
                           HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                             JUDGEMENT DATED 15th JUNE, 2023

                             CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 1812/2023

      Between:-
      DHOLU @ CHANDRABHAN S/O SHRI BHEEKAM SINGH,
      AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O GRAM KHADBAI THANA DABRA
      DEHAT, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                     .....PETITIONER
      (BY MS. UMA KUSHWAH - ADVOCATE )

      AND

      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE
      STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION DABRA DEHAT,
      GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                  ..... RESPONDENT
      ( BY MR. RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)



          This revision coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
 following:-

                                        ORDER

1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioner under section 397

r/w section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated

13/01/2021 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior in

Cr.A. No. 01/2021 affirming the judgment dated 13/01/2021 passed in Regular

Criminal Trial No. 55/2018 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dabra, District Signature Not Verified Gwalior, whereby, the learned trial Court convicted the petitioner for the offence Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM

punishable under Section 323 & 354 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for One Year with fine of Rs. 100/- and under Section 456

of IPC sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One Year with fine of

Rs. 100/- with default stipulation.

2. As per prosecution story, short facts of the case leading to filing of this

criminal revision are that the complainant has lodged the report to the police

station concerned alleging therein that on 02/01/2018 at about 6 Pm when she was

alone in her home as her husband went to the temple and door of her house was

opened and she was preparing meals for her family members, at that time, the

petitioner entered into her house with an ill intention and caught hold her hand and

pressed her breast and due to scuffle her left hand bangles were broken and

thereafter, she screamed loudly, at that time, her husband Sanjay @ Chandrabhan

and her neighbour Rambabu Rajak came at the spot of incident and on seeing

them, the petitioner fled away from the spot. Thereafter, the complainant on

03/01/2018 lodged the report bearing crime No. 0002/2028 at police station Dabra

Dehat, District Gwalior. On lodging of F.I.R., criminal law was triggered and set

in motion, investigation agency arrived at spot, the injured was sent for medical

examination, recorded the statements of the eye-witnesses; prepared the spot map;

arrested the accused persons and after completion of all due formalities, the charge

sheet was submitted before the trial Court having criminal jurisdiction. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM

3. The learned trial Court framed the charges against the petitioner for the

offence punishable under sections 323, 354, 456 of IPC, which were denied by the

petitioner. In order to bring home the charges, prosecution has examined as many

as Five witnesses (PW- 1 to PW-5). The defence of accused is of false implication

and the same defence has been put forth by him in his statement recorded under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

4. The learned trial Court after hearing learned counsel for the rival parties and

after appreciating the evidence available on record vide judgment dated

13/01/2021 passed in Regular Criminal Trial No. 55/2018 convicted the petitioner

for the offence punishable under Section 323 & 354 of IPC and sentenced him to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for One Year with fine of Rs. 100/- and under

Section 456 of IPC sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One Year

with fine of Rs. 100/- with default stipulation. Being aggrieved, the petitioner

filed an appeal bearing Cr. A. No. 01/2021 before the learned First Additional

Sessions Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior. The learned lower appellate Court after

hearing learned counsel for the rival parties vide impugned judgment dated

21/04/2023 affirmed the judgment dated 13/01/2021 passed by the trial Court,

against which, the present revision is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the accused/petitioner argued that the petitioner has

falsely been implicated in the case. It is further argued that there are omissions and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM

that prosecution has not examined any independent witness, but only interested

witnesses have been examined. It is further argued that the petitioner is facing the

criminal proceedings from the date of incident i.e. 02/01/2018 to till date and is

suffering physically and mentally for the same and the petitioner has already

served total incarceration of approximately two months till date including pre and

post conviction period out of total awarded maximum sentence of One year. It is

further argued that no external or internal injury was found on the body of the

prosecutrix and the prosecutrix is a consenting party, but the learned trial Court

has ignored this important aspect of the matter and has convicted the petitioner

vide impugned judgment. On these grounds, it is prayed that the revision filed by

the petitioner deserves to be allowed and the judgment of conviction deserves to

be set aside.

6. In alternative, leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has already served total incarceration of approximately two months till date out of

total awarded maximum sentence of One Year including pre and post conviction

period. It is further submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the fact that

petitioner has already served substantive part of jail sentence, the same may be

reduced to the period already undergone and the amount of fine may reasonably be

enhanced.

7. Learned counsel for respondent/State submits that after due appreciation of Signature Not Verified evidence, learned Court below has found the offence proved against the petitioner, Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM

which requires no interference. It is submitted that the revision filed by the

petitioner be dismissed.

8. From perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that no illegality has

been committed by the learned Courts below in convicting the petitioner, hence

the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Courts below requires no

interference and the same is hereby maintained.

9. So far as the period of sentence is concerned, looking to the limited prayer

made by the counsel for the petitioner and the nature of offence and the fact that

petitioner is facing the criminal proceedings since 2018 and has already served

substantive period of jail sentence, the purpose would be served in case the jail

sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone.

However, for the offence punishable under Section 323 & 354 of IPC, the

petitioner is directed to pay compensation as Rs. 10,000/- and for the offence

punishable under Section 456 of IPC, the petitioner is further directed to pay

compensation as Rs. 10,000/- i.e. total compensation of Rs. 10,000/- + Rs.

10,000/- = Rs. 20,000/- in addition to the fine already imposed by the trial Court .

10. In the result, this criminal revision is partly allowed. The findings of

conviction are hereby maintained with the modification to the extent that the jail

sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone

subject to depositing fine amount as imposed by the Courts below as well as Signature Not Verified additional amount of compensation of Rs. 20,000/-, out of which, an amount of Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM

Rs. 10,000/- shall be payable to the complainant /victim within a period of two

months from today, failing which, the petitioner shall suffer jail sentence awarded

by the learned Court below. The petitioner is in jail. He be released and set free,

if not required in any other case.

11. With the aforesaid modification, the instant criminal revision stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE Durgekar*

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 19-06-2023 05:47:18 PM