Manna @Manoharlal vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 15864 MP

                                                           1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                           ON THE 26 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
                                           CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1452 of 1998

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    MANNA @ MANOHARLAL S/O BIHARILAL, AGED
                                ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION : SERVICE, R/O
                                BAGHANA, DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    KAILASH @ KALUA A S/O BADRILAL, AGED
                                ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION : LBOURER, R/O
                                BAGHANA,    DISTRICT  MANDSAUR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....APPELLANTS
                          (BY SHRI SHIVENDRA SINGH RAWAT - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA             PRADESH THROUGH
                          DISTRICT  MAGISTRATE,             NEEMUCH (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI MUKESH SHARMA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

                                This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                         JUDGMENT

The appellants have preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short "Cr.P.C.") being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23/11/1998 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Neemuch (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.57/1989, whereby the the appellants have been convicted under Section 325 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and both of them have sentenced to undergo Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 9/27/2023 12:34:24 PM

07 years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- with usual default stipulation.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 26/02/1988 at about 09:00 PM three persons namely Sharif, Saddha and Aslam were returning to their home on a Motorcycle, at that time, near Railway Bridge present appellants along with other co-accused persons (who have been acquitted by the trial Court) came there armed with wooden sticks and they wrongfully restrained their way by throwing their cycle in front of the motorcycle. As a result of which, Sharif, Saddha and Aslam fell down on earth. Then present appellants and co-accused persons started beating them. Upon this, Waheed Musalman came there

intervene to rescue, then accused persons have also beaten him. Due to which, Waheed Musalman sustained various injuries over his head and other vital parts of the body. Sharif has also sustain various injuries. In the meanwhile, police reached on the spot and accused persons fled away from the spot. Waheed was taken to the hospital and during the treatment he succumbed to the injuries. Complainant Sharif lodged an FIR at Police Station Baghana. Injured Saddha, Aslam and Sharif were also sent for medical examination and they have been examined by the concerned doctor. During the investigation one cycle was seized from the spot at the instance of appellant Kailash and wooden sticks were also recovered from the possession of accused persons. Spot map was also prepared.

3 . After completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the appellants / accused persons before the JMFC, Neemuch, who has committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Neemuch, which was later on transferred to the II ASJ, Neemuch (M.P.). The prosecution has examined as

Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 9/27/2023 12:34:24 PM

many as 16 witnesses before the trial Court, while the defence has examined O.P.Sahu (DW-1), Sohanlal (DW-2), Girdhrilal (DW-3) and Prakashchandra (DW-4).

4. The trial Court after considering the submissions advanced by both the parties and after scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record, convicted the present appellants under Section 325 IPC and sentenced them as mentioned herein above and have been acquitted from all the other charges. Other co- accused persons have also been acquitted from all the charges. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and the sentence passed by the trial Court, the appellants have preferred present criminal appeal before this Court.

5.The appellants have preferred the present appeal on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellants submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and he is not assailing the conviction part of the judgment but he confined his argument only to the extent of quantum of sentence part. His only prayer is that imprisonment of the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone as the appellants have suffered some period of jail incarceration during the trial as well as during the pendency of the appeal. They are regularly marking their presence before the Court. They are poor persons and are not having any criminal background. Therefore, their sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by

them.

6. 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 after due appreciation of evidence and the sentence in question is sufficient, therefore, no interference is warranted.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their arguments Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 9/27/2023 12:34:24 PM

and perused the record and evidence produced by both the parties.

8 . 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 trial Court.

9. So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the submissions made b y the learned counsel for the appellants appears to be just and proper. The appellants have already suffered jail incarceration from 24/05/1988 to 14/06/1988 and 23/11/1998 to 16/06/1999 i.e. for more than 07 months during the trial as well as during the pendency of the appeal. At the time of incident, appellants were 47 and 37 years of age and now they turned to 82 and 72 years respectively. They are not having any criminal background. They are facing trial since 1988 i.e. for last 35 years. Therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence awarded to them.

10. Considering the aforesaid, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of appellants under Section 325 of IPC from 07 years RI to the period already undergone by them i.e. almost seven months. The sentence awarded to the appellants is modified to the aforesaid extent. The fine amount of Rs.10,000/- imposed by the trial Court is hereby affirmed, which has already been deposited by the appellants in the trial Court.

11. Consequently, the present criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged. Disposal of the property shall be as per the order of the trial Court.

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

Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 9/27/2023 12:34:24 PM

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Tej

Signature Not Verified Signed by: TEJPRAKASH VYAS Signing time: 9/27/2023 12:34:24 PM