Punam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4330 MP

                                                           1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                               ON THE 20 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                           CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1530 of 2003

                          BETWEEN:-
                          PUNAM S/O SUNDARLAL GADRI, AGED ABOUT 25
                          YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MAZDOOR R/O
                          VILLAGE MAIDA, POLICE STATION       HANDIYA,
                          DISTRICT HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI SANJAY KUSHWAHA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HARDA DISTRICT
                          HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI PRAMOD CHOUBEY - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                Th is appeal coming on for direction this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                          JUDGMENT

Appellant- Punam is present in person. He is identified by his

counsel. His presence is marked.

On due consideration I.A. No. 6592/2023 an application for modification of order dated 20.02.2023, which is duly supported by an affidavit of appellant-Punam, is hereby allowed. Non-bailable warrant issued against the appellant is hereby recalled.

With the consent of both the parties, appeal is heard finally. This criminal appeal is preferred under section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. by Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 3/21/2023 1:34:42 PM

the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.09.2003 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) in S.T. No. 14/2003 whereby the appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- with default stipulation.

2. As per prosecution case, the present appellant along with co- accused committed maar-peet with the complainant. Allegation against the present appellant is that he has assaulted the complainant with Karpa (iron rod).

3. During investigation, spot map was prepared, articles were

seized and thereafter taking the statements of the witnesses in the matter, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and co-accused persons.

4. The prosecution has examined total 11 witnesses namely Rakesh (PW-1), Ramlal (PW-2), Dr. Beerendra Kumar Khandelwal (PW-3), Prem Narayan (PW-4), Radhakishan (PW-5). Ramshankar Yadav (PW-6), Haidar (PW-7), Ramsagar (PW-8), Ramnath Singh (PW-9), Dr. Rajendra Kumar Patel (PW-10) & R.S. Mishra (PW-11).

5. In defence, the appellant has not examined any witness.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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 7 days. It is pertinent to note that this appeal is of the year 2003 and after about 20 years, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence as already undergone, looking to the fact and circumstances of the case. Thus,

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 3/21/2023 1:34:42 PM

the ends of justice would be met if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him with fine.

7. Learned counsel for the State has justified and supported the conviction and sentence passed by trial Court.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record along with the impugned judgment. It would be in the interest of justice, if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him by enhancing the fine amount.

9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial Court under 325 of IPC is hereby affirmed. However, the jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing fine of Rs. 20,000/- and out of this amount Rs. 15,000/-shall be paid to the complainant as compensation.

10. The appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced fine amount within a period of 90 days from today, failing which, he has to undergo the sentence awarded by the trial court. The appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall remain discharged subject to deposit of enhanced fine amount within stipulated period.

11 . The order of the learned trial Court regarding seized property stands confirmed.

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

13. Appeal is finally disposed off.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 3/21/2023 1:34:42 PM

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE MISHRA

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 3/21/2023 1:34:42 PM