Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yusuf Khan vs State Of M.P. on 22 August, 2025
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:18864
1 CRA-936-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 22nd OF AUGUST, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 936 of 2013
YUSUF KHAN
Versus
STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Shri Shobhendra Kumar Tiwari - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Harish Sharma - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
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 23.08.2013 passed by the Special Judge
[(Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act],
Guna in Special Sessions Trial No.16/2013, whereby the appellant has been
convicted for the offence under Sections 452, 323 (3 count) and 294 of
Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and sentenced to undergo 2 years RI with
fine of Rs.2,000/-, 6 months RI with fine of Rs.500/- and fine of Rs.200/-
respectively with usual default stipulations.
2. Prosecution story, in short, is that on 19.01.2012 at about 07:00 PM
when complainant Kashiram along with his wife Kasturi and son Bhura was
at his home, at that time, present appellant/accused Yusuf Khan due to
previous enmity entered into his house armed with stick and abused him in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:18864
2 CRA-936-2013
filthy language and also caste related words and told him that "you do too
much leadership" and he attacked upon the complainant by means of stick,
due to which, complainant Kashiram sustained injuries at palm of left hand.
When Kasturi and Bhura tried to intervene, then they were also beaten by the
appellant. Appellant threatened them for life. On the same day, complainant
Kashiram lodged FIR at Police Station Umari, District Guna. Accordingly,
the offence has been registered.
3. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed
against the appellant before JMFC, Guna, who committed the case to the
Court of Special Judge. The Trial Court has framed charges against the
appellant for offence under Sections 452, 323 (3 count), 294, 506 (Part-II) of
IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Act, 1989.
4. Appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded complete
innocence. Prosecution has examined as many as 7 witnesses, while defence
did not examine any witness.
5. The Trial Court after considering the submissions advanced by both
the parties and scrutinizing the entire evidence available on record convicted
and sentenced the appellant for the offences mentioned hereinabove. Being
aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred
this appeal before this Court.
6. During course of the arguments, learned counsel for the appellant
did not press this criminal appeal on merits and he is only assailing the final
part of the impugned judgment. He confined his arguments on the point of
sentence only. The appellant has faced trial for long 13 years. During
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:18864
3 CRA-936-2013
trial, appellant has suffered incarceration for the period of 02.02.2012 to
01.05.2012 (about 3 months) and from 23.08.2013 to 10.12.2013 (3 months,
17 days) and from 15.04.2014 to 22.07.2015 (1 year, 3 months, 7 days). He
has already suffered jail incarceration for sufficient period. He has deposited
the fine amount. Consequently, leaned counsel for the appellant prays for
reduction of jail sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the
prayer and prays for its rejection by supporting the impugned judgment.
8. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the record,
submissions of learned counsel for the appellant appear to be just and proper
and appellant has already suffered sufficient incarceration and conviction has
not been challenged by the appellant, therefore, it will be appropriate to
partly allow the appeal by affirming the conviction of the appellant, however,
reducing the jail sentence to the period already undergone by him.
Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed by maintaining the conviction of
the appellant, but reducing the jail sentence to the period already undergone
by the appellants. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant is hereby
maintained.
9. The appellant is on bail. His bail bond stand discharged.
10. The order pronounced by the Trial Court regarding compensation
amount to the complainant and victim persons is hereby affirmed.
11. The order pronounced by the Trial Court regarding disposal of the
seized property is hereby affirmed.
12. Pending IA, if any, are also disposed of.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:18864
4 CRA-936-2013
13. Let a copy of this order along with record of the Court below be
sent back to the concerned Trial Court for information and
necessary compliance.
14. Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Abhi
