Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukesh vs State Of M.P. on 14 May, 2024
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
ON THE 14 th OF MAY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1264 of 2009
BETWEEN:-
MUKESH S/O MADANLAL, AGED 23 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: NONE R/O GRAM BICHHADOD,UJJAIN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI MOHAMMAD IKRAM ANSARI - ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF M.P. AG THRU. PS. GHATIYA, UJJAIN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT/STATE
(BY SHRI HEMANT SHARMA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal u/S 374 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant
No.2/accused Mukesh being aggrieved by the judgment dated 03.11.2009
passed by II ASJ, Ujjain in ST No.355/2009, whereby the learned trial Court
has convicted the appellant and co-accused persons Mahesh and Madanlal u/S
324 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced to 01 year of R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/- each
with default stipulation.
2. During pendency of this appeal, appellant No.1 and 3/co-accused
persons Mahesh and Madanlal had died, therefore, appeal on their part has been
abated and as per order dated 23.01.2015 and 31.07.2015, their names were
deleted on the memo of appeal.
3. Prosecution story, in brief is that there was old animosity between
complainant Jagdish and co-accused Mahesh and present appellant Mukesh. On
10.03.2009, at around 06:00 PM, the complainant Jagdish was going to market,
when he reached near the house of the accused persons, the co-accused Madan
started to abuse him in filthy language. Then co-accused Mahesh gave sword
blow on his head with intent to kill him. The appellant Mukesh Joshi gave lathi
blow on his left thigh. The matter was reported on the same day by complainant
Jagdish. Dr. A.K. Singh examined the complainant and he issued MLC report
(Ex.P/1), the complainant was referred to District Hospital, Ujjain for X-ray of
his head and further treatment. X-Ray was taken on 12.03.2009, at Distt.
Hospital, Ujjain but no bony injury was found on his head. After completion of
investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before JMFC, Ujjain. The case was
committed before Sessions Judge, Ujjain and the same was transferred to trial
Court.
4. Learned trial Court framed charge u/S 307 r/w 34 of IPC against the
appellant and co-accused persons. After completion of prosecution evidence,
the accused persons were examined u/S 313 of Cr.P.C. The appellant had taken
defence that he is innocent and he was implicated in the case due to old enmity.
Though, no defence witness has been examined by the appellant.
5. After hearing both the parties, the learned trial Court had acquitted the
appellant and co-accused persons u/S 307 r/w 34 of IPC but convicted them
u/S 324 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced them as mentioned above.
6. The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal on several grounds but
during the course of argument, learned counsel for appellant did not press this
appeal on merit and does not assail the finding part of the judgment. He
confines his argument on the point of sentence only and submitted that as per
allegation the appellant gave lathi blow on left thigh of the complainant and
main accused was Mahesh, who gave sword blow on the head of the
complainant. The appellant has already been in incarceration during trial from
18.03.2009 to 29.03.2009 and during appeal since 08.04.2024, he is in custody,
a total of around 01 month and 17 days. It is further submitted that the appellant
deserves some leniency as he has already suffered the ordeal of trial since 2009.
Therefore, it is prayed that this appeal be partly allowed and the sentence
awarded upon the appellant be reduced to the period he has already undergone
by enhancing the fine amount.
7. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, supports the
impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal of this appeal.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The
submission of the learned counsel for the appellant appears to be just and
proper. Hence, finding force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for
the appellant and the fact that the appellant suffered the ordeal of criminal case
since 2009, this appeal deserves to be allowed.
9. Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained.
The jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by
him and looking to the nature of the injury sustained by injured Jagdish, the fine
amount of appellant/accused Mukesh is enhanced to Rs.5,000/-. If any fine
amount already paid, the same shall be adjusted with the aforesaid fine amount.
The appellant shall be released on payment of the fine. The fine shall be paid to
the complainant Jagdish as compensation. The default stipulation shall be of 1
month of simple imprisonment.
10. Registry is directed to supply copy of this order to the appellant
through his counsel. A copy of this order alongwith the records be sent to the
concerned trial court for necessary compliance.
11. Application, if any, shall stand disposed of. Accordingly, this appeal
is disposed of.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE
Shruti
