Imran vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 18228 MP

                                                       1
                            IN   THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                           ON THE 1 st OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                         CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 10940 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           IRFAN @ KALA S/O AKRAM @ KALLU, AGED ABOUT 25
                           Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: DRIVER  HOUSE   NO.12,
                           TOPKHANA ROAD, THANA KHARAKUAN, DISTRICT
                           UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI UMESH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION G.R.P., DISTRICT
                           UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI SURENDRA GUPTA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                         CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3841 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           IMRAN S/O AKRAM @ KALLU, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: DRIVER, R/O: H.NO.12, TOPKHANA, P.S.
                           KHARAKUA, DISTT. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI UMESH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION GRP, DISTT.
                           UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....RESPONDENT
                           (SHRI SURENDRA GUPTA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE AND
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 02-11-2023
14:54:09
                                                        2
                           SHRI RAJOO K. PANDAGRE - ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT)

                                 These appeals coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                              JUDGMENT

With the consent of counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally.

2. Appellants have preferred these appeals under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 31.01.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No.182/2020, whereby both the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 307/34 and 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 4 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2000/- and 6 months R.I. with fine of Rs.1000/- respectively with usual default stipulation.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 29.09.2022 at 19:30 PM, complainant Shahid @ Bhanja used to drive auto-rickshaw at Railway Station Mal Godam and collected the money on behalf of Sushmita's contractor. Some dispute has been taken place between both the parties regarding parking amount. Thereafter, appellants Imran and Irfan attacked the complainant by means of knives and appellant Imran stabbed knife on the chest of complainant and appellant Irfan assaulted him with iron pipe on his knee, due to which, complainant sustained fatal injuries. After that, appellants fled away from the spot. Dr. Yogesh Saraf (PW-7) has conducted MLC of the victim. Complainant lodged the Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-5). During the investigation, T-shirt, Vest and Lower of the complainant have been seized. Alleged weapon used in the aforesaid incident has also been recovered from the possession of appellants.

4. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the appellants / accused persons before the JMFC, who has committed case to the Court of Sessions. The appellants abjured their guilt and took a plea Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 02-11-2023 14:54:09

that they have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The trial Court after considering the submissions advanced by both the parties scrutinized the entire evidence available on record convicted and sentenced the appellants / accused persons as mentioned herein above.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that during the pendency of these appeals, victim Shahid (PW-2) and both the appellants have preferred joint compromise petition under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., which has been duly verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court on 27.09.2023 and as per the verification report, both the parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement or coercion and they have amicably resolved their disputes.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the matter has been amicably settled between both the parties. Offence under Section 323 of IPC is compoundable in nature, however, offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC is non-compoundable. Both the appellants have suffered jail incarceration for a period of about 10 months and 7 days, therefore, they do not challenge the conviction.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the appeal and prays for its rejection by submitting that the Court below has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants and the sentence in question is sufficient.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their arguments and perused the record and evidence produced by both the parties.

9. In view of the above submissions, although the conviction has not been challenged, but perusal of the evidence available on record also justifies the judgment of conviction passed by the Court below. On the basis of the compounding of offence, appellants deserve for acquittal for the offence under Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 02-11-2023 14:54:09

Section 323 of IPC. Matter has also been amicably settled between the parties. So far as the quantum of sentence for the offence under Section 307/34 of IPC is concerned, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants appears to be just and proper. The appellants have already suffered jail incarceration for some time i.e. from 08/03/2020 to 15/04/2020 and from 31/01/2023 to 01/11/2023. Appellants are facing trial for last 03 years. Appellant Irfan is young person of 25 years of age and appellant Imran is 19 years old and they are not having any criminal background. Therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence awarded to them.

10. Considering the aforesaid, appellants are acquitted for offence under Section 323 of IPC. Their conviction for offence under Section 307/34 is upheld, but I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of both the appellants to the period already undergone by them. The sentence of appellants for offence under Section 307/34 of IPC is modified to the aforesaid extent. The fine amount imposed by the Court below is hereby affirmed.

11. Consequently, the present criminal appeals are partly allowed to the extent as indicated herein above. The appellants are in jail. They be released forthwith, if not required in any case. Disposal of the property shall be as per the orders of the trial Court.

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

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Anushree Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 02-11-2023 14:54:09

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 02-11-2023 14:54:09