Virendra Singh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3630 MP

                                                                      1
                                     IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                          AT JABALPUR
                                                               BEFORE
                                                   HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
                                                          ON THE 1 st OF MARCH, 2023
                                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2780 of 2016

                                    BETWEEN:-
                                    1.    VIRENDRA   SINGH  RAJPUT   S/O LATE
                                          MOKAMSINMGH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
                                          OCCUPATION: TEAMAN H.NO.48 NEELKANT
                                          COLONY VISHWAKARMA NAGAR BHOPAL
                                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    2.    URMILA SINGH RAJPUT W/O VIRENDRA SINGH
                                          R A J P U T H.NO.48 NEELKANT   COLONY
                                          VISHWAKARMA NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                          PRADESH)

                                                                                                 .....APPELLANTS
                                    (BY SHRI M. SHAFIQULLAH - ADVOCATE)

                                    AND
                                    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH P.S. NISHATPURA
                                    BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                                    (BY SHRI SOURABH SHUKLA - PANEL LAWYER FOR STATE)

                                          This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                    following:
                                                                       ORDER

This appeal preferred by the accused/appellants being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.08.2016 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No.999/2015,

Signature Not Verified whereby the appellant No.1- Virendra Singh Rajput has been convicted under SAN

Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Section 323 of IPC and with fine of Rs.1000/- and appellant No.2-Urmila Singh Date: 2023.03.03 14:34:35 IST

Rajput has been convicted under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced till rising of

the Court with fine of Rs.5000/-, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the trial Court has convicted the appellants merely on it has been mere presumption and assumption without proper appreciation of evidence available on records. He further submits that learned trial Court has failed to consider the fact of counter case registered against the complainant party. He further submits that learned trial Court has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective, which has caused miscarriage of justice. Hence, appellants prayed to acquit them from the aforesaid charges.

Learned Panel Lawyer has vehemently opposed the contentions of learned counsel for the appellants and supported the findings recorded by the learned trial Court.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. There is no inconsistency between the testimonies of the injured person and the medical evidence. Further, finding of the learned trial Court is properly based on the evidence available on record in which there is no perversity or illegality. The trial Court passed appropriate sentence regarding the offence committed by the appellant No.1-Virendra under Section 323 of IPC with fine of Rs.1000/- and similarly under Section 324 of IPC. Learned trial Court has convicted the appellant No.2-Urmila under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced till rising of the Court with fine of Rs.5,000/-.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, in the considered opinion of this Signature Not Verified SAN Court, trial court has rightly convicted the appellants for committing aforesaid Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2023.03.03 14:34:35 IST offences. This appeal being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE Nitesh

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2023.03.03 14:34:35 IST