Pappu Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17985 MP

                                                            1
                          IN       THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
                                              ON THE 30 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                           CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3174 of 2018

                         BETWEEN:-
                         1.    PAPPU KHAN S/O ISMAIL, AGED 32 YEARS, R/O
                               VILLAGE KUNMADA, P.S. MACHALPUR, TEH.
                               JEERAPUR,   DISTT.  RAJGARH     (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         2.    NASIR S/O GHEESA KHAN, AGED 21 YEARS, R/O
                               VILLAGE KUNMADA , P.S. MACHALPUR, TEHSIL
                               JEERAPUR, (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         3.    BHERULAL S/O BHANWARLAL DANGI, AGED 30
                               YEARS,     R/O VILLAGE KUNMADA,    P.S.
                               MACHALPUR, TEHSIL JEERAPUR, (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONERS
                         (BY SHRI VISHAL PANWAR - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRU. P.S.
                         MACHALPUR, TEH. JEERAPUR, DISTT. RAJGARH
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....RESPONDENT/STATE
                         (BY MS. BHAGYASHREE GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

                                  This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                             ORDER

This criminal revision u/S 397 r/w 401 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the petitioners/accused persons being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.06.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions

Signature Not Verified Judge, Distt. - Rajgarh, in Cri. Appeal No.385/2016 whereby, the learned Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 03-11-

2023 10:22:13

Additional Sessions Judge has partly allowed the appeal. Learned Appellate Court had upheld conviction and sentence of petitioners u/S 325/34 of IPC and acquitted them from S.341 and 323/34 of IPC. Learned trial Court in judgment dated 28.11.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jeerapur, Distt. - Rajgarh in criminal case No.388/2011 had convicted the petitioners u/S 341, 323/34 and 325/34 of IPC and sentenced to 3 months of R.I and fine Rs.1,000/- , 3 months of R.I. and fine Rs.1,000/- and 6 months of R.I. and fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively to each, with default stipulation.

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 28.07.2011, at around 02:30 PM, the complainant Mubarik Hussain alongwith Shahzad was having tea in the shop

of Kanhaiyalal. Then the accused persons Pappu Khan, Bhairulal Dangi, Naseer and Saddam came and started abusing the complainant and asked him that why has he lodged a false report against them. The accused persons had beaten up the complainant by means of lathi and as Shahzad tried to save him, he was also beaten up by the accused persons. The complainant sustained injuries on his head, both shoulders, legs, back and waist. Shahzad sustained injuries near his left ear and back. The matter was intervened by Kanhaiyalal, Bhagwan Singh, Mohan Singh, Bhairu Singh and Devilal. The matter was reported. In medical examination, a fracture in the left hand of complainant Mubarik Hussain and other injuries were found.

3. The petitioners have preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of argument, learned counsel for petitioners did not press this revision on merit and does not assail the finding part of the judgment. He confines his argument on the point of sentence only and prays that the petitioners have already undergone 38 days in incarceration. It is further Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 03-11-

2023 10:22:13

submitted that the petitioners deserves some leniency as they already suffered the ordeal of trial since 2011. Therefore, it is prayed that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded upon the petitioners be reduced to the period they have already undergone by enhancing the fine amount.

4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be just and proper. Hence, finding force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the fact that the petitioners suffered the ordeal of criminal case since 2011. After lapse of almost more than 12 years, no purpose would be served in sending the petitioners to jail after such a long period.

6. Therefore, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained. The jail sentence of the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the fine amount of petitioners/accused Pappu Khan, Nasir and Bherulal is enhanced to Rs.5,000/- each, which shall be paid to the complainant/injured person Mubarik Hussain (PW-1). In case the petitioners fail to deposit the fine amount within 2 months from the date of receiving of copy of this order, the default stipulation shall be of 2 months of simple imprisonment. If any fine amount already paid, the same shall be adjusted with

the aforesaid fine amount. The bail bonds of the petitioners shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount before the learned trial Court.

7. Registry is directed to supply copy of this order to the petitioners through their counsel free of cost. A copy of this order alongwith the records be sent to the concerned trial court for necessary compliance.

8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed off. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 03-11-

2023 10:22:13

(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE Shruti

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 03-11-

2023 10:22:13