Sachin vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 4965 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sachin vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 February, 2024

Author: Hirdesh

Bench: Hirdesh

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                        BEFORE
                                              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
                                               ON THE 20 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1355 of 2010

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SACHIN S/O ASHOK PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: SERVICE 236,KRISHNA BAG COLONY,
                           OPP. TO BARFANI DHAM, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....APPELLANT
                           (NONE FOR THE APPELLANT)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                           STATION KHAJRANA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENT
                           ( BY SHRI MAYANK MISHRA- PANEL LAWYER )

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

Appellant has filed this appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure against the judgment dated 19.10.2010 passed by learned X Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No.52/2010, whereby trial Court has convicted appellant under Sections 326, 324 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo 2 years R.I, 6 months RI with fine of Rs.2,000/-, 500/- with default stipulation.

2. I have perused the impugned judgment and the record of the case.

3. So far as conviction is concerned, I have gone through the evidence adduced by the prosecution and perusal of the same reveal that learned trial Court did not commit any error in convicting the appellant under Sections 326,

324 of the IPC. Hence, findings recorded by the trial Court with respect to conviction are affirmed.

4. So far as sentence is concerned, according to the charge sheet, the incident had taken place on 07.08.2009. He remained in custody from 09.10.2009 to 14.10.2009. Appellant/accused was 32 years of age at the time of incident and now he is near about 47 years old. On the above grounds, it is urged that the appellant be sentenced with the period already undergone by him.

5. Hence, in view of above facts and circumstances of the case, appeal filed by the appellant is partly allowed and while modifying the sentence of imprisonment, appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him

with fine as imposed by the trial Court. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged accordingly.

6. With the aforesaid present appeal stands partly allowed to the extent indicated above.

(HIRDESH) JUDGE RJ