Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7813 MP
Judgement Date : 11 May, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 11 th OF MAY, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 163 of 2005
BETWEEN:-
MUNNA S/O RAJJU LAL YADAV, AGED ABOUT 35
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GRAM PATHARRA, NARAYAN,
P.S. BHANDER, DISTRICT DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI SASHI KUMAR KHARE- ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
APPOINTED THROUGH LEGAL AID SERVICES AUTHORITY )
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION
BHANDER, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI SUSHANT TIWARI- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT-
STATE)
This appeal coming on for HEARING this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by appellant challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02-02-2005 passed by Sessions Judge,Datia in Sessions Trial No.79 of 2004, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 304 Part II of IPC (for causing firearm injury to Savitri Bai) and sentenced to undergo ten years RI and further sentenced to undergo one- one year RI for offence under Section 324 of IPC (on two counts for causing injury two injured Vinod and Atar Singh) and further sentenced to one year RI for offence under Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 5/12/2023 11:08:59 AM
Section 25(1-B)(A) of Arms Act respectively. All sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he does not want to challenge the conviction of appellant for the aforesaid offences. As regards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the incident took place on 25-06-2004 all of sudden and appellant has facing agony of trial for near about 19 years. It is further submitted that the appellant was sometime in custody during trial and after passing of impugned judgment, he has already suffered near about four years of jail incarceration. Therefore, by awarding fine amount suitably, the remaining substantive jail sentence of the appellant may be
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment.
Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, ends of justice would meet if by awarding fine amount of Rs.50,000/- under Section 304 Part II of IPC, the remaining substantive jail sentence of appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of appellant for aforesaid offences, remaining substantive jail sentence of appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him and aforesaid fine amount be given to heirs of victim injured Savitri Bai upon their identification as compensation which shall be deposited by appellant within a period of two months from today, failing which the appellant shall have to undergo the remaining part of jail sentence as awarded by the trial Court.
With aforesaid modification, the appeal stands partly allowed and disposed of.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 5/12/2023 11:08:59 AM
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE MKB
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 5/12/2023 11:08:59 AM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!