Salman Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 3000 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Salman Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 February, 2024

                                                           1
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
                                             ON THE 1 st OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                           CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2164 of 2008

                         BETWEEN:-
                         SALMAN KHAN S/O SAGIR BHAI, AGED ABOUT 23
                         YEAR S, R/O ANNU NAGAR, NEAR RAILWAY TRACK
                         KAROND P.S. NISHATPURA DISTT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                         PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPELLANT
                         (BY MS. SEEMA SAHU - AMICUS CURIAE)

                         AND
                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR:                      P.S.
                         NISHATPURA, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI NARENDRA LODHI - PANEL LAWYER)

                               Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                         following:
                                                       JUDGMENT

By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No.175/2008 dated 16.09.2008 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 324/34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced t o undergo R.I. for 6 months.

2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant, Ms. Seema Sahu, Advocate who is present in the court, has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of

the appellant as amicus curiae.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 06.02.2008 at about 11:20 pm when complainant Irfan @ Chhotu was going towards city as and when he reached in front of house of Bunty @ Sajid, appellant came there armed with knife along with Ubes Khan and appellant assaulted by knife on left hand's palm of complainant. On the report of complainant, FIR was registered and the matter was investigated. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and upon conclusion of trial, the appellant was held guilty and sentenced as detailed above.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that from the evidence on record, the appellant is entitled to be acquitted, alternatively, he submits that in

facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone. He further submits that during the trial, the appellant remained in custody for 3 days. The incident was of the year 2008 and taken place all of a sudden and heat and passion. There was no mens ria behind the incident so a liberal view of the point of sentence be taken by the Court as the appeal is pending since 2008, so he prayed that the sentence be reduced to period already undergone.

5. Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer submitted that the findings of learned trial Court does not call for any interference. But, it would be appropriate to consider on the point of sentence and Court is at liberty to consider the matter on the point of sentence.

6. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of record, FIR was lodged on 06.02.2008 and offence u/S 324/34 of IPC has been registered against him. After investigation charge sheet was filed.

7. Learned trial Judge after considering the statements of the witnesses by

judgment dated 16.09.2008, convicted the appellant under Section 324/34 of the IPC and sentenced as stated herein above. The findings and conviction recorded by the learned trial Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not require any interference. The judgment of conviction and conviction under Section 324/34 of the IPC is upheld.

8. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2008, the appellant remained in custody for 3 days, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellant on record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of the appellant to the extent of the period which he has already undergone.

9. Accordingly, the jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone and the sentence of fine amount is maintained. The appellant is on bail, his personal bonds and bail bonds be discharged. The order of the trial Court regarding disposal of the property shall be intact. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.

10. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI) JUDGE m/-