(Deleted As Per H.C.O. Dated ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 8805 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

(Deleted As Per H.C.O. Dated ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 April, 2024

Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta

Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta

                                                            1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
                                                 ON THE 1 st OF APRIL, 2024
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 33 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    (DELETED AS PER H.C.O. DATED 26/02/2024) DILIP
                                 AND ANR. S/O JAGANNATH, AGED ABOUT 65
                                 Y E A R S , GRAM  RANAYAL     P.S.AVANTIPUR
                                 BARODIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    MANOHAR    S/O   DILIP GRAM RANAYAL,P.S.
                                 AVANTIPUR   BARODIYA     DIST. SHAJAPUR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI YOGENDRA SINGH, ADVOCATE APPEARED FOR PETITIONER.)

                           AND
                           THE   STATE  OF  MADHYA    PRADESH  GOVT.
                           THRU.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,SHAJAPUR (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI HEMANT SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE.)

                                 T h is revision coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt 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 petitioner/ accused being aggrieved

by the judgment dated 26/12/2013 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Shujalpur, Distt.- Shajapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 408/ 2012, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has partly allowed the appeal by maintaining the conviction u/S 325 r/w 34 of IPC and reducing the sentence to 6 months to

each alongwith fine of Rs. 500 to each, arising out of judgment dated 23/07/2012 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shujalpur, Distt.- Shajapur in criminal case no. 1492/2009, whereby learned trial court had convicted the accused persons u/s 325 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced to 1 year of R.I. and fine Rs. 500/- to each with default stipulation.

2. Prosecution story in brief is that on 09/11/2009 at around 07:30 AM the complainant Hari Prashad (PW/ 1) was assaulted by the petitioner Manohar and co-accused Dilip (Dead) by means of Lathi. He received 3 injuries including fracture in left Fibula and right Tibia and Ribula. The matter was reported.

3. Petitioner no. 1 Dilip had died during the pendency of this revision

petition, thus the revision has abated against him.

4. The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of argument, learned counsel for petitioner 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 petitioner has already undergone since 26/12/2013 - 04/02/2014 in incarceration. It is further submitted that the petitioner deserves some leniency as he has already suffered the ordeal of trial since 2009. Therefore, it is prayed that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded upon the petitioner be reduced to the period he has already undergone by enhancing the fine amount.

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

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be just and proper. Hence, finding force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the fact that the petitioner suffered the ordeal of criminal

case since 2009, this revision petition deserves to be allowed.

7. Therefore, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained. The jail sentence of the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him and looking to the nature of the injury sustained by injured Hari Prasad (PW/1), the fine amount of petitioner/ accused Manohar is enhanced to Rs.25,000/-, which shall be paid to the complainant/ injured Hari Prasad (PW/1). In case if the petitioner fails to deposit the fine amount within 3 months, from the date of receiving of copy of this order, the default stipulation shall be of 6 months of simple imprisonment. If any fine amount already paid, the same shall be adjusted with the aforesaid fine amount.

8. Registry is directed to supply copy of this order to the petitioner through his counsel. A copy of this order alongwith the records be sent to the concerned trial court for necessary compliance.

9. Accordingly, this petition is disposed off.

(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE ajit