Madhya Pradesh High Court
Momin @ Billu vs The State Of M.P. on 13 August, 2025
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17689
1 CRA-268-2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 13 th OF AUGUST, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 268 of 2004
MOMIN @ BILLU AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Shri Arvind Dwivedi - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Saket Udenia - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Shri Prabhakar Kushwah and Shri SKS Chauhan - advocate for the
respondent/complainant.
ORDER
Heard on I.A.No.11432 of 2022, for deleting the name of appellant No.2
Naeem alias Sheikh Naeem Ahmed due to this death.
The factum of death of appellant Naeem alias Sheikh Naeem Ahmed has
been verified by SHO PS Guna and also by I ASJ, Guna. On the basis of the
aforesaid, it is proved that appellant No.2 Naeem has died on 23.07.2020 in a road
accident. Therefore, this IA is allowed and the appellants are permitted to delete
the name of appellant No.2 Naeem alias Sheikh Naeem Ahmed within three
working days by amending the array of appellants. Resultantly, this appeal stands
abated on behalf of appellant No.2 Naeem alias Sheikh Naeem Ahmed.
Perused the verification report submitted by the Pr. Registrar of this court.
He has recorded statements of victim persons and submitted a verification report
stating that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties without any
threat, inducement and coercion.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17689
2 CRA-268-2004
In view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties,
I.A.No.12493 of 2022 under Section 320(1) of Cr.P.C and 12495 of 2022 under
Section 320(2) of Cr.P.C are partly allowed in relation to offence punishable under
Section 323/149 of IPC and the appellants are acquitted from the offence
punishable under Section 323/149 of IPC. Since, offences punishable under
Section 148 and 307/149 are non compoundable, therefore, the compromise
cannot be permitted for compounding these offences.
The present Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') has been preferred against the impugned judgment
dated 26.04.2004 passed by I ASJ, Guna in S.T.No.304 of 2002 convicting the
appellants under section 148, 307/149 and 323/149 of IPC but sentencing them for
the offences punishable under Sections 307/149 and 323/149 of IPC only to
undergo Five years RI with fine of Rs.500/- each and three months RI each
respectively with usual default stipulations.
Prosecution story, in short, is that on 13.08.2002 when Abdul Sattar and
Sameer Rehbar were returning from Sonali Public School at about 12 O'Clock near
Sonali Public School on Sahyog Hospital Road, appellants surrounded them armed
with sword, farsa, hockey-stick, iron rod, Ballam and Katta and Afsar gave a pipe
blow on the head of Abdul Sattar who was driving the scooter due to which, Abdul
Sattar and Sameer Rehbar fell down from the scooter. When they tried to run
away, accused Gapoli gave a hockey blow on the right leg of Sameer Rehbar then
Shamma fired a gun shot by katta at Abdul Sattar which hit him on the thigh and
he fell down on the ground. Thereafter, all the accused persons gave beating with
their respective weapons. Sameer Rehbar saw all these persons assaulting them
and running from the spot. Thereafter, they narrated whole incident to Aunt
Vimmi and accordingly, the offence has been registered at PS Guna.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17689
3 CRA-268-2004
After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before CJM,
Guna, who committed the case to the court of sessions. Later on, the case had been
transferred to Additional Sessions Judge. The trial court has framed the charges
under section 148, 307 read with section 149, 324 read with Section 149 of IPC.
The appellants abjured their guilt and pleaded complete innocence. The
prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses, whereas, the defence has
examined only one witness Mahesh Sharma (DW1).
The Trial Court after considering the submissions advanced by both the
parties and scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record convicted and
sentenced the appellants for the offence mentioned herein above. Being aggrieved
by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellants have preferred this appeal
before this Court.
During course of the arguments, learned counsel for the appellants did not
press this criminal appeal on merits and he is only challenging the sentencing part
of the impugned judgment. He confined his arguments only to the extent of
quantum of the sentence only. Appellant No.1 Momin remained in custody for
about 91 days and he is aged about 42 years, Appellant No.4 Aqeel Baksh
remained in custody for about 127 days and he is aged about 38 years. appellant
No.5 Shehzad alias Gapoli remained in custody for about 14 days and he is now,
about 41 years of age and appellant No.3 Rais alias Bhura alias Afsar alias Retik
remained in custody for about 61 days and is aged about 44 years as of now and all
the appellants remained in custody during trial also from 26.04.2004 to
27.05.2004 for about 30 days. They are facing trial since 23 long years. They have
no criminal past. They have already deposited the fine amount as imposed by the
Trial Court, therefore, learned counsel prays for only reducing the sentence to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17689
4 CRA-268-2004
period already undergone by them.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State and counsel for the
complainant opposed the prayer and pray for its rejection by supporting the
impugned judgment.
From perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that no illegality has
been committed by the learned Court below in convicting the appellants, hence,
the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Court below requires no
interference and is hereby maintained.
So far as the period of sentence is concerned, looking to the limited prayer
made by the counsel for the appellants and the nature of offence and the facts that
Appellant No.1 Momin remained in custody for about 91 days and he is aged
about 42 years, Appellant No.4 Aqeel Baksh remained in custody for about 127
days and he is aged about 38 years. appellant No.5 Shehzad alias Gapoli remained
in custody for about 14 days and he is now, about 41 years of age and appellant
No.3 Rais alias Bhura alias Afsar alias Retik remained in custody for about 61
days and is aged about 44 years as of now and all the appellants remained in
custody during trial also from 26.04.2004 to 25.07.2004 for about 30 days, they
are facing trial since 23 long years, they have no criminal past and they have
already deposited the fine amount as imposed by the Trial Court, the purpose
would be served in case the jail sentence awarded to the appellants is reduced to
the period already undergone by them keeping the fine amount awarded by the
trial court as intact.
In the result, this appeal is partly allowed . The findings of conviction are
hereby maintained with the modification to the extent that the jail sentence
awarded to the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone subject to
depositing fine amount as imposed by the Trial Court concerned within a period of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17689
5 CRA-268-2004
two months, if not already deposited, failing which the appellants shall suffer jail
sentence awarded by the learned Court below.
The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged.
The order passed by the Trial Court regarding disposal of the seized property
is also hereby affirmed.
All the pending IA, if any, are also disposed of.
Let a copy of this order along with record be sent back to the concerned
Trial Court for information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Rks
