Baaman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 4367 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Baaman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2024

                                                             1
                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
                                              ON THE 15 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1048 of 2009

                          BETWEEN:-
                          BAAMAN S/O JAGANNATH BAGADRE, AGED ABOUT 35
                          YEARS, R/O JAMBADA, P.S.AAMLA, DISTRICT BETUL
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI P.N. VERMA - AMICUS CURIAE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.P.S.AAMLA,
                          DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....RESPONDENT/STATE
                          (BY SMT. SEEMA SAHU - PANEL LAWYER)

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

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 Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Betul, in Special case No.30/2008 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 354 o f Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six Months and fine of Rs.200/-, and in default, to further undergo R.I. for fifteen days.

2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant, Shri P.N. Verma Advocate who is present in the Court, has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of

the appellant as amicus curiae.

3. The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal in brief are that on 19/12/2007 an FIR was lodged at Police Station Aamla, District Betul by the prosecutrix alleging therein that the appellant tried to outrage her modesty.

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 fact 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 5 days. The incident is of the year 2007 since then the appellant is facing mental agony. At the time of incident, the appellant was of 35

years of age. He has no criminal antecedent. He is the first offender. As per the record, he never misused the conditions of bail. There was no mens ria behind the incident so a liberal view of the point of sentence be taken by the Court, 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. 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, it appears that FIR was lodged at P.S.Aamla District Betul on 17/12/2007 against the appellant which was registered as Crime No.485/2007 under Sections 354, 509 of IPC and 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed.

7. Learned trial Judge after considering the statements of the witnesses by judgment dated 29/4/2009 convicted the appellant under Section 354 of of IPC and sentenced as stated herein above, however, the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not require

any interference. The judgment of conviction under Section 354 of IPC is upheld.

8. However, looking to the facts that the incident is of the year 2007 since then the appellant is facing mental agony, the appellant remained in custody for 5 days. Appellant was of 35 years of age at the time of incident. 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 354 of Indian Penal Code at that time, therefore, 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 (5 days) by him and the sentence of fine amount is maintained. Order of the trial Court regarding disposal of the property is also maintained.

10. The appellant is on bail, his personal bond and bail bond be discharged. Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed.

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

(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI) JUDGE m/-