Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jagdish @ Kallu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1 CRA-6259-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6259 of 2022
JAGDISH @ KALLU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Mohd. Ali - Sr. Advocate with Shri Amit Raizada - Advocate
for the appellant.
Shri Pradeep Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved on : 24.03.2025
Pronounced on : 07.04.2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C has been filed against
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.07.2022, passed in
Sessions Trial No.28/2020 (State of M.P. Vs. Jagdish @ Kallu) by IInd
Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai, District Sagar (M.P.), whereby appellant has
been convicted for commission of offence under Section 304 part-II and 323 of
IPC and has been sentenced to undergo seven years' RI and fine of Rs.1000/-
and six months' RI and fine of Rs.500/- respectively with default stipulations.
2. As per the prosecution case in brief, on 20.08.2020 at about 5.00 p.m.
complainant/injured - Dropati along with Kamlesh had gone to bring the cow
fodder from the agricultural field of Natthu Kushwaha. Juvenile/accused came
2 CRA-6259-2022
and abused complainant. After some time juvenile/accused again came along
with present accused/appellant- Jagdish @ Kallu. When complainant- Dropati's
father Mannu tried to pacify the matter, accused/appellant-Jagdish with an
intention to kill him wielded axe on his head. Mannu fell down and blood
started oozing out from his head. He succumbed to his injuries. The present
appellant- Jagdish @ Kallu also assaulted injured/complainant-Dropati with the
blunt side of axe.
3. After investigation, charge sheet was filed before learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class who in its turn committed the case to the Court of
Sessions and from where on transfer it was received by Second A.S.J. Khurai,
District Sagar (M.P.).
4. Learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai, District Sagar framed
charges against appellant/accused for commission of offence under Section 302
or in the alternative 302 read with Section 34 and Section 323 or in the
alternative 323 read with Section 34 of IPC. Accused abjured his guilt and
claimed to be tried.
5. In order to prove its case prosecution examined 16 witnesses i.e.
Bhagwati (PW-1), Bhikam (PW-2), Dropati (PW-3), Nihal (PW-4), Rooprani
(PW-5), Balram (PW-6), Gangaram (PW-7), Kamlesh(PW-8), Natthu (PW-9),
Dr. Goving Mool (PW-10), Shikha Jain (PW-11), Firdos (PW-12), Ajay Sahu
(PW-13), Dr. D.V.S.Chouhan (PW-14), Vivek Pratap Singh (PW-15) and Sonam
Pandey (PW-16). While appellant/accused examined one Shivraj Kushwaha
(DW-1) as witness in his defence.
6. After hearing both the parties, learned Second Additional Sessions Judge,
Khurai District Sagar (M.P.) convicted the appellant under Sections 304 Part-II
and 323 of IPC in place of Section 302 or in the alternative 302 r/w Section 34
3 CRA-6259-2022
and Section 323 or in the alternative 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC respectively and
sentenced him as mentioned herein above. Hence, this appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant, at the very outset submitted that he
does not wish to press the appeal on merits and confined his argument to the
sentence part. The maximum sentence awarded is only seven years. He submits
that appellant has already undergone sentence for more than 5 years and three
months. Therefore, it is prayed that jail sentence awarded to the appellant may
be reduced to the period of jail sentence already undergone by him.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has supported
the findings recorded by the Trial Court and has prayed for dismissal of the
appeal.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the findings
recorded by the Trial Court & the material available on record.
10. Learned Trial Court has duly appreciated the oral and documentary
evidence on record and has rightly come to the conclusion that appellant has
committed offence under Sections 304 Part-II and 323 of IPC in place of
Section 302 or in the alternative 302 r/w Section 34 and Section 323 or in the
alternative 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC respectively. There are no reasons to
interfere with the findings recorded by the Trial Court. Therefore, conviction of
appellant for commission of offence under Sections 304 Part-II and 323 of IPC
as recorded by the Trial Court being just and proper is hereby confirmed.
11. As far as, reduction of jail sentence of appellant is concerned, it is
apparent that appellant has already suffered approximately a period of more than
five years and three months as substantive jail sentence, therefore, I am of the
view that it would be just and proper, if jail sentence awarded to appellant is
reduced/modified to the period already undergone by him so far.
4 CRA-6259-2022
12. Therefore, having taken into consideration the above submissions and
others facts & circumstances of the case, it appears just and proper to modify
the sentence. Therefore, appellant's sentence of RI for seven years for
commission of offence under Section 304 Part-II of IPC and sentence of RI for
six months for commission of offence under Section 323 of IPC is modified and
appellant/accused is sentenced to the period of jail sentence already undergone
by him so far with fine amount imposed by the Trial Court.
13. Consequently, this criminal appeal is partly allowed with the aforesaid
modification in the sentence.
14. The order of the Trial Court with regard to the disposal of the property is
affirmed.
15. Registry/Trial Court is directed to prepare super-session warrant/release
warrant and to send the same to the Superintendent of jail/Jail authorities
concerned with a direction that if appellant/accused is not required in any other
case, he be released in this case forthwith.
16. Learned Trial Court is directed to ensure the aforesaid compliance.
17. Let record of the Trial Court along with copy of this order be sent down
to Court concerned for information and necessary compliance through the
Sessions Judge, District Sagar (MP).
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
DV
