Vinod Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 12684 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vinod Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 May, 2024

Author: Prem Narayan Singh

Bench: Prem Narayan Singh

                                                            1
                          IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT INDORE
                                                   BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                                 ON THE 6 th OF MAY, 2024
                                          CRIMINAL REVISION No. 481 of 2018

                         BETWEEN:-
                         VINOD KUMAR S/O VIMAL KUMAR TAMBOLI, AGED
                         ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O BHANPURA,TEHSIL-BHANPURA
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....PETITIONER
                         (SHRI NILESH DAVE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .

                         AND
                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH                    THROUGH
                         DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MANDSAUR                    (MADHYA
                         PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                         SHRI SAGAR MULEY PL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE
                         GENERAL.

                               Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                             ORDER

With the consent of the parties heard finally.

1 . This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by t h e petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment dated 24.01.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanpura, District-Mandsaur in Cr.A No.82/2017, affirming the judgment dated 24.12.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class in Criminal Case No.593/2015, whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Sections 411 of IPC, sentenced to undergo 01 years R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-

with usual default stipulations.

2.The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press this revision on merit and nor assailed the finding part of judgment. He confined his argument on the point of sentence only and prays that since the petitioner has already undergone approximately 27 days of jail incarceration, therefore his sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. It is further submitted that the petitioner deserves some leniency as he has already suffered the ordeal of the trial since 2015 i.e. for a period of 09 years. It is further submitted that this petition be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the

petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount.

3. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of this revision.

4. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be just and proper.

5. However, the learned trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court has not committed any error in appreciation of evidence available on record. Further, it is found that both the courts below considered the evidence available on record and correctly found that the case of the prosecution is well supported b y the injured, witnesses and documentary evidence. Both the Courts below have well considered the material available on record, hence, no infirmity is found in the impugned order of conviction passed by both the Courts below, accordingly, the same is upheld.

6. So far as the sentence of the applicant is concerned, taking into

consideration that the incident had taken place in the year 2015 and further the applicant has already undergone jail sentence of approximately 27 days, this Court is of the view that the conviction of the applicant under Section 411 of IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.10000/- which will be deposited within a period of two months from today.

8. The fine amount, if already deposited shall be adjusted.

9. The bail bond of the applicant shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount. If the applicant fails to deposit the fine amount, he will suffer 03 months of simple imprisonment in default and thereafter completion of the same, he shall be released from jail, if not required in any other case.

10. The order of learned trial Court regarding disposal of the seized property, if any, stands confirmed.

11. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

12. Pending application, if any, stands closed.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE amit