Liyakat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4092 MP

                                                                      1
                                    IN      THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                          AT JABALPUR
                                                             BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                         ON THE 15 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2860 of 2000

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   LIYAKAT S/O MAJBOOT KHAN, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
                                   VILLAGE    NIWAR,  P.S.  BAXWAHA,    DISTRICT
                                   CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                                   (BY SHRI A.K. CHOURASIYA - ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                                   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                                   STATION   BAXWAHA,   DISTRICT  CHHATARPUR
                                   (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....RESPONDENT
                                   (BY SHRI DINESH PATEL - PANEL LAWYER)

                                          Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                     JUDGMENT

This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. by the

appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 21.11.2000 passed by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in S.T. No.178/99 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 01 year with fine of Rs.500/- also with default stipulation.

Signature Not Verified As per the prosecution story, on 11.03.1997 at about 7-8 AM appellant SAN

Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED alongwith co-accused persons armed with lathi, hasiya and khaderua reached ANSARI Date: 2023.03.16 17:53:28 IST

the field of complainant and caused injuries to him.

The prosecution has examined total 07 witnesses namely; Devsingh (PW-

1), Sheelchand (PW-2), Acchelal (PW-3), Rajendra Singh (PW-4), Roopsingh (PW-5), Dr. Anil Jain (PW-6) and S.K. Jain (PW-7). Though the appellant/accused abjured his guilt and he took a plea that he is innocent.

In defence, the appellant has examined the witnesses namely; Nandkishore (DW-1) and Gunba (DW-2).

The appellant was tried and charged under Section 323 of IPC. The learned trial Court, after considering the evidence and material available on record has convicted the appellant, as stated above.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not

challenging the finding of conviction recorded by the trial court and his only prayer is that the appellant has already suffered the jail sentence of about 15 days. It is pertinent to note that this appeal is of the year 2000 and after about 22 years, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone, looking to the fact and circumstances of the case. Thus, the ends of justice would be met if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

Learned Government Advocate for the State has no objection to the same.

On perusal of record, it reveals that appellant has been facing criminal proceedings since last 22 years. Appellant has already suffered the jail sentence of about 15 days. It is pertinent to note that this appeal is of the year 2000 and after about 22 years, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence of the Signature Not Verified SAN appellant under Section 323 of the IPC to the period already undergone by him. Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED ANSARI Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed. Date: 2023.03.16 17:53:28 IST

The appellant is in jail. He be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case in jail.

The order of the trial Court regarding disposal of the seized article stands confirmed.

Let record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action.

Appeal is finally disposed off.

Pending I.As if any, shall also stands disposed off. Office is directed to comply with the order immediately. Certified copy, as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE kafeel

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED ANSARI Date: 2023.03.16 17:53:28 IST