Madhya Pradesh High Court

Kalu And 2 Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 2024

Author: Hirdesh

Bench: Hirdesh

                                                           1



                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                      BEFORE
                                            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
                                                 ON THE 3 rd OF MAY, 2024
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 28 of 2014

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    KALU AND 2 ORS. S/O GIJIYA KATARA, AGED
                                 ABOUT 35 YEARS, GRAM SADEDA MATA FALIYA
                                 P.S.THANDLA,  DISTRICT-JHABUA   (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    JOTI @ JOTIYA S/O GIJIYA KATARA, AGED ABOUT
                                 40 YEARS, GRAM SADEDA MATA FALIYA P.S.
                                 THANDLA DIST. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    DHARMA S/O GIJIYA KATARA, AGED ABOUT 55
                                 YE A R S , GRAM SADEDA MATA FALIYA P.S.
                                 THANDLA DIST. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)




                                                                                     .....APPELLANTS
                           (SHRI PRATEEK      MAHESHWARI,      LEARNED     COUNSEL    FOR   THE
                           APPELLANTS).

                           AND
                           THE   STATE   OF      MADHYA    PRADESH  GOVT.
                           THRU.P.S.THANDLA,     DISTRICT-JHABUA  (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENT
                           (SHRI MAYANK      MISHRA,   LEARNED     PANEL   LAWYER     FOR   THE
                           RESPONDENT)

                                 T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                           following:
                                                         JUDGMENT

Appellants have filed this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 24.12.2013 passed by Sessions Judge, Jhabua, District-Jhabura in S.T. No.19/2011 whereby trial Court has convicted the appellants under Sections 353 /34 (four counts) and 332 r/w 34 (four counts) of IPC and sentenced them to undergo 1-1 year R.I. with fine of Rs.500-500/-, with default stipulation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, submits that he is not challenging impugned judgment on merits and is confining his argument to sentence only.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

4. So far as conviction is concerned, I have gone through the evidence adduced by the prosecution and examined it minutely. From perusal of overall evidence on record, it is clearly established that learned trial Court did not commit any error in convicting the appellants under Section 353 /34 (four counts) and 332 r/w 34 (four counts) of IPC. Hence, findings recorded by the trial Court with respect to conviction are affirmed.

5. So far as sentence is concerned, record of the case reveals that incident took place on 24.01.2010 and since then the appellants are regularly appearing before the concerned Court on the dates so fixed for their appearance. Therefore, at this juncture after 13 years, if they are sent to jail then enmity between the parties will further increase and appellants may become hard criminal in the company of hard criminals in jail. This is first offence of the accused. Appellant Nos.(1)-Kalu (2) Joti @ Jotiya remained in jail from 28.06.2010 to 21.07.2010 and appellant No.(3) - Dharma remained in jail from 26.06.2010 to 21.07.2010, hence, the end of the justice would be best served, if

their sentence is reduced to the period already undergone.

6. In view of the aforesaid, present appeal is partly allowed and conviction of the appellants by the trial court is upheld. So far as sentence awarded by the trial court is concerned, same is modified to the period already undergone by the appellants in jail.

7. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the concerned court for compliance. The present appeal is partly allowed.

Let the record of the trial court be sent back.

(HIRDESH) JUDGE N.R.