Atish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 14124 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Atish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 May, 2024

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                      CRA No. 8692 of 2022
                                           (ATISH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                          Dated : 14-05-2024
                                Shri Mohammad Ikram Ansari, counsel for the appellant.

                                Shri Vinod Thakur appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
                                Shri Amit Dube, counsel for the Respondent No.2.

The present appeal is filed under section 372 Cr.P.C. filed by the victim being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.7.2022 passed by II ASJ, Mahidpur, district Ujjain in S.T.No. 157/2019.

Counsel for appellant submits that respondent No.2 has been awarded lesser sentence. According to the prosecution story, it is alleged that respondent No.2 has caused injury to Sultan(PW-10) who is a child aged 4 years by brick. Respondent No.2 was chargesheeted for the offence under section 307 IPC also but he has been convicted only under sections 394 and 335 IPC and sentenced to undergo fine of Rs.1000/- and 6 days S.I. and also to deposit fine of Rs.10000/- under section 357(3) Cr.P.C..

Counsel for respondent No.2 raised an objection that present appeal is not maintainable under section 372 Cr.P.C. as the victim has no right to

question the sentence being inadequate. In support of his submission, counsel has placed reliance on the judgment passed in the case of Parvinder Kansal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 19 SCC 496 wherein it has been held that appeal seeking enhancement of sentence at the instance of victim under section 372 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Counsel submits that appeal preferred by the complainant is under section 372 Cr.P.C. and hypertechnical approach of relief cannot be applied. He has challenged the conviction for lesser offences

also.

After hearing learned counsel for parties and considering the proviso of section 372 Cr.P.C. that victim has been conferred right to prefer appeal against any order passed acquitting accused or convicting for lesser offence or imposition of inadequate compensation and such appeal lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinary lies against the order of conviction. Thus, the proviso of section 372 confers right to the victim to file an appeal against conviction for a lesser offence. The hypertechnical approach in such matters cannot be adopted.

The judgment relied on by the counsel for respondent cannot be applied

in the facts of the present case. In the present case, victim who is 4 years child was examined in the Court as PW-10 and he has supported the prosecution case. Thus, the objection raised by the respondent No.2 regarding maintainability is overruled and appeal is admitted for final hearing.

The respondent No.2 shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount within a period of 1 month from today to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 22.08.2024 and on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

MK