Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mehtab vs The State Of M.P. on 6 March, 2024
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 6 th OF MARCH, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1032 of 2000
BETWEEN:-
MEHTAB S/O HARISINGH AGED 40 YEARS OCCUPATION
CULTIVATION R/O VILLAGE RAMPURIYA DISTRICT
RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(NONE )
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH POLICE STATION
KALIPITH DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI SANTOSH SINGH THAKUR- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
The appeal is listed for final hearing since 02.01.2024 but there is no
representation on behalf of appellant.
The appeal is of year 2000. Considering the same, the appeal is
considered on merit.
The present appeal is filed under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C being
aggrieved by the order dated 05.09.2000 passed by Sessions Judge, Rajgarh in
ST No.55/1994, whereby, the appellant has been convicted under section 307
of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI of 5 years with fine of Rs.5000/-.
The facts of the case are that on 26.7.1993 at about 6.00 - 7 A.M. when
the complainant Chainsingh and Hari Narayan, Pratap, Badari, Kanta Prasad and
Vijaysingh were on their field situated in the forest in between the village
Rampuriya and Talawada, at that point of time, the accused persons 14 in
numbers including the appellant arrived on the spot. They were
armed with weapons like lathis and farshi etc. and they started grazing their
cattles on the field of the complainant. The complainant and his brother asked
them to stop their cattles from grazing. Upon this, there arose same scuffle
between the complainant party and the accused and it was alleged that all the 14
accused persons started assaulting the complainant Chainsingh and others. It is
further alleged that in the said scuffle alongwith complainant Chainsingh other
persons namely Kanta Prasad, Vijaysingh, Heri Narayan, Pratap and Bedari
were also injured. The report of the incident was lodged by the complainant
Chainsingh and thereafter, on the basis of the said report, the police registered
an offence under section 307/149, 324/149 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal
Code against the accused persons. Consequently, all the 14 accused persons
were arrested and prosecuted by the police. All the accused persons abjured
their guilt and faced trial.
That, the learned Trial Court acquitted 13 accused persons out of total 14
accused and found only one accused i.e. the present appellant. guilty for
commissioning an offence under section 307 of Indian Penal Code and
sentenced him for 5 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/- and in
default of payment of fine to suffer further 1 year RI vide its judgment dated
5.9.2000.
The statement of the victim Vijay PW/4 that the appellant caused injury to
him with Axe and the other accused persons also caused him injury. The
statement of complainant is well corroborated by the complainant PW/1
Chainsingh. The appellant was charged alongwith 13 accused persons with the
aid of section 149 of IPC. However, 13 persons have been acquitted.
The statement of the witnesses is corroborated with the testimony of
Dr.OP Tripathi PW/8, who deposed that the appellant had received wound
injury on the head, which was 1x1/2 inch. There was a fracture on the head 1x4
inch. There were other three injuries on right cheek and left hand. It was opined
that the injury no.1 and 4 were caused by sharp edged weapon and the other
injuries were caused by hard and blunt object. His report is Exb.P/2. Apart
from that axe was seized from the appellant vide Exb.P/3.
Thus, the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the
appellant that he had intention to kill the deceased as he had given axe blow on
the head of the deceased. This court does not find any error in the order of
conviction under section 307 of IP.
The case is also considered on sentence.
The incident is of year 1998 and from the record, it appears that the
appellant had remained in jail during trial and after conviction for about four
months, he was on bail during the trial and appeal. He did not misuse the liberty.
No purpose would be served in sending the appellant in jail after such long time.
Therefore, while maintaining the conviction under section 307 of IPC, the
jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him
and the fine amount of Rs.5000/- is enhanced to Rs.10000/-. The enhanced fine
amount shall be deposited within the period of three months from today. Out of
Rs.10000/-, Rs.9000/- shall be paid to the victim Vijay PW/4 by the trial court.
If the enhanced fine amount is not deposited within the said period, the
appellant shall undergo the remaining jail sentence as per the order of trial court.
Since the appellant is not being represented by any counsel, the order
passed today shall be communicated to him by Registry of this court through
concerned police station.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Sourabh
