Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:4950
1 CRA-12608-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 24th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12608 of 2024
ARUN S/O PUNAMCHAND YADAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Appellant by Shri Nilesh J. Dave - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Virendra Khadav -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
JUDGMENT
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard finally.
This criminal appeal preferred under Section 415 (2) of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) = Section 374 (2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as the Code) assails
impugned judgment and order dated 07.11.2024 passed in Session Trial
No.103 of 2023 by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Biaora, District
Rajgarh (MP), whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence under
Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1908 (herein after referred to as IPC)
on two counts and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of
five years with fine of Rs.10,000/- on each count along with usual default
stipulation.
2. As per prosecution case, on 06.10.2022 at about 11:30 PM,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:4950
2 CRA-12608-2024
complainant Jitendra S/o Chandarsingh Yadav was standing in front of his
house, his brother Jagdish S/o Shambhulal Yadav and a resident of the same
place Arun Yadav S/o Poonamchand Yadav (the appellant) was also standing
there. Arun Yadav was raising a dispute with Jagdish (PW-8) and
demanding money by hurling filthy abuses; and when Jagdish asked the
appellant not to abuse, he (Arun Yadav) started assaulting him with kicks
and fists. When Jitendra (PW-1) intervened, he was also assaulted by the
appellant with iron tommy (a tool), which caused serious injury in his head.
The incident was reported to Police Station Suthaliya, District Rajgarh (MP)
where an offence was registered at Crime No.314 of 2022; investigation
ensued; and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed.
The learned Judicial Magistrate of competent local jurisdiction, after
complying with provisions under Section 207 of the Code, committed the
case to the Court of Sessions from where it was made over to learned First
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Biaora for trial. Learned trial Court
framed charges under Sections 294, 323, 326 and 506 of IPC, on which, the
appellant abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried. The prosecution
examined witnesses and also marked documents in evidence. Learned trial
Court, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, by impugned
judgment convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned herein above,
which gives rise to this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the judgment has
been passed without appreciating evidence in right perspective. It suffers
from serious infirmities and irregularities, which have been ignored in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:4950
3 CRA-12608-2024
passing the impugned judgment. Therefore, learned counsel prays for
allowing this appeal and acquitting the appellant of the charges for which he
has been convicted by the learned trial Court.
3.1 In the alternative limb of prayer, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that the incident took place near about three years back on
06.10.2022. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and entered into
a compromise, which has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this
Bench, therefore, he urges the Court that even if the conviction is upheld, the
jail sentence imposed on the appellant may be reduced to the period already
undergone by him, as the appellant has already suffered jail incarceration of
near about four months.
3.2 In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the appellant
has placed reliance on the following two judgments delivered by Hon'ble
Apex Court in case of Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab & another
reported in 2014 Criminal Law Journal 2436 (paragraph No.30) and in case
of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another reported in 2012 Criminal Law
Journal 4934 (paragraph No.53).
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - State has
opposed the prayer stating that the judgment has been passed on due
appreciation of evidence and no fault can be found with either in conviction
or sentence.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
record.
6. From statement of complainant Jitendra (PW-1) and injured
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:4950
4 CRA-12608-2024
Jagdish (PW-8), it is well proved that it is the appellant who assaulted them
and caused serious injuries. Statement of Jitendra is not only supported by
statement of Jagdish (PW-8), but also by First Information Report (FIR)
Exhibit P/1 lodged by him. The prosecution case is also supported by
medical evidence, which has been proved by Dr. Mustafa Hussein (PW-6),
Dr. Charul Vyas (PW-10) and Dr. Ankita Chhipa (PW-7). The evidence
available on record amply proves that the appellant has committed offence
under Section 326 of IPC (on two counts), as found proved by the learned
trial Court. The finding in this record does not suffer from any infirmity,
therefore, rejecting the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant,
conviction of the appellant as recorded by learned trial Court is upheld.
7. As far as the sentence, the prayer made on behalf of the appellant
appears to be reasonable. In the backgrounds, that the parties have entered
into a compromise, no criminal antecedents are attributed to the appellant
and he has already suffered jail incarceration of four months, therefore, this
Court is inclined to allow the alternative prayer made on behalf of the
appellant; and the period of jail sentence deserves to be reduced to the period
already undergone.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the
appellant is hereby affirmed. The jail sentence awarded to the appellant by
the learned trial Court is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
The appellant is in jail. Let a copy of judgment of this Court be sent to the
concerned Jail Authorities by fastest available mode to release the appellant
forthwith, if not required in any other case.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:4950
5 CRA-12608-2024
Let the record of the learned trial Court along with a copy of this
judgment be also sent back immediately to the concerned Court for
compliance and necessary action. The order passed by learned trial Court in
paragraph No.35 of the impugned judgment will remain intact.
9. Accordingly, the criminal appeal stands partly allowed and
disposed off.
Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed off.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
