Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abdul Kadir vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 1st OF MAY, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2132 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ABDUL KADIR S/O ABDUL KHALIK, AGED
ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O DURGA NAGAR,
NAGAR KOT NEAR MATA MANDIR UJJAIN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI MOHAN SINGH THAKUR CHANDEL -
ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE
STATION CHIMANGANJ MANDI DISTT.
UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( BY SHRI PRASHANT JAIN GWALIORY GA)
______________________________________________________________
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court
passed the following:
JUDGMENT
Heard on I.A. no. 1937/2023, which is an application for
dispensing with filing of affidavit in support of condonation of
delay.
The appellant is in jail and the present appeal has been filed
through Legal Aid Committee, therefore the I.A is allowed and the
appellant is dispensed with filing of the aforesaid affidavit
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL N
MAHANAG
Signing time: 01-05-2023
18:37:28
Also heard on I.A. no. 1936/2023, which is an application
filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay
of 2754 days in filing present appeal.
The trial Court has passed the impugned judgment on
13/05/2015. The appellant is suffering jail sentence for about 14
years passed in Sessions Trial no. 241/2013. Earlier he could not
file appeal due to lack of knowledge. His family members had also
not filed any appeal on his behalf, therefore, the I.A is allowed and
the delay of 2754 days in filing present appeal is hereby condoned.
Record of the Court below has been received.
Heard on admission.
With consent of both the parties, present appeal is heard
finally.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant under section 374
of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short " Cr.P.C ) against the
impugned judgment dated 13/05/2015 passed by Sessions Judge,
Ujjain in Sessions Trial Case no. 587/2013 whereby the appellant
has been convicted under section 308 of the Indian Penal Code (in
short"the IPC") and sections 25(1-a) (a) and 27 of the Arms Act
and sentenced to undergo three years R.I. and two years R.I on both
counts respectively.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 19-3-2013 at
11.00 a.m. complainant Pawan was at his home, at that time, the
appellant along with co-accused Haider arrived at the house of
complainant Pawan on a blue colored Pulsar motor cycle and
called Pawan outside the house. As soon as Pawan came out of
the house, the accused persons fired one by one from the pistol
with 'the intention of killing Pawan. The fire by appellant Abdul
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL N
MAHANAG
Signing time: 01-05-2023
18:37:28
Kadir was hit the door. Complainant Pawan narrowly escaped.
On being badgered by him, the accused fled from the spot. The |
incident was also witnessed by Pawan's mother Parvatibai and
Kishore, Dharmendra and Tulsiram. On the same day the
incident was reported by the complainant Pawan at Police Station
Chimanganj Mandi. While reporting by Pawan, it was also told
that he had deposied against the accused Haider in the Sachin
murder case, in which co-accused Haider was convicted, due to
which the accused had committed the said incident. Accordingly,
the aforesaid offence was registered against the appellant and
other co-accused person. During investigation, on 22/03/2013,
appellant Abdul Kadir was arrested and one katta with magazine
and motorcycle was recovered from his possession and the seized
katta was examined by armour. After obtaining permission for
prosecution from the District Magistrate, Ujjain, charge-sheet has
been prepared.
3. After conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was
filed against the appellant before the JMFC, Ujjain who committed
the case to the Sessions Judge, Indore. After completion of trial and
appreciation of evidence available on record, the trial Court
convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned herein above.
Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, the
appellant preferred present appeal before this Court.
4. Present appellant has preferred the instant appeal on
several grounds, but during the course of the arguments, learned
counsel for the appellant did not press this appeal on merit. He did
not assail the finding part of the judgment. He confined his
argument to the quantum point of the sentence. His only prayer is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL N
MAHANAG
Signing time: 01-05-2023
18:37:28
that sentence/imprisonment of the appellant be reduced to the
period already undergone as the appellant has already suffered two
years, three months and seventeen days jail imprisonment and he is
facing criminal proceedings since 2013, therefore, it is prayed that
his jail sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone.
5. Per-contra, learned GA for the respondent/State has
opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant by
submitting that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced
the appellant.
6. Heard learned counsel for both the parties, as also
considered their arguments.
7. In view of the submissions, although the conviction
has not been challenged, but perusal of the evidence available on
record also justifies the judgment passed by the trial Court.
8 So far as quantum of sentence is concerned, the
submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant appears to
be just and proper. The appellant has already suffered two years,
three months and seventeen days jail imprisonment out of three
years jail sentence, therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce his
jail sentence to the period already undergone.
9. Having regard to the aforesaid, present appeal is partly
allowed by maintaining the conviction, but reducing the jail
sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant. The
appellant is in jail. He be released from jail, if not required in
any other offence. The order regarding disposal of the property as
pronounced by the trial Court, is confirmed.
10. Present Criminal Appeal stands disposed of
accordingly.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL N
MAHANAG
Signing time: 01-05-2023
18:37:28
11. A copy of this judgment alongwith the record of the
trial Court be sent back to the concerned Court for information and
necessary compliance.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
amol
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL N
MAHANAG
Signing time: 01-05-2023
18:37:28
