Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dhan Singh And Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2025
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:1647
1 CRR-1561-2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 15th OF JANUARY, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1561 of 2000
DHAN SINGH AND ORS. AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Smt. Shanti Tiwari - Amicus Curiae.
Smt. Geeta Yadav - Govt. Advocate for State.
ORDER
No one appeared on behalf of the applicants to argue this criminal
revision. This criminal revision is pending since the year 2000. Hence, Ms.
Shanti Tiwari, Advocate, who is present in the Court, is appointed as Amicus
Curiae on behalf of the applicants to assist the Court.
2 . As per the case of the prosecution, on 02-03-1981 at about 05:00
p.m. in the evening when the complainant along with his daughters was
proceeding on a bullock-cart loaded with woods, the accused-applicants met
them on way and inflicted injuries on the complainant by means of "lathis"
and axes, as a result of which the complainant sustained injuries on his
person.
3. The report of the aforesaid incident was lodged and after due
investigation, the trial was conducted by the trial Court i.e. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Seoni vide Criminal Case No.1843 of 1995. The trial Court on
appraisal of evidence available on record convicted the applicant vide
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:1647
2 CRR-1561-2000
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.12.1995 for the
offences punishable under Sections 148, 326 in the alternative 326/149 of the
Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 3 months and
R.I. for 4 years with fine of Rs.3000/- each, respectively with default
stipulations.
4. Assailing the said conviction and sentence, the applicants preferred
an appeal before Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni vide Criminal Appeal
No.123 of 1995, which has been dismissed by the lower appellate Court vide
judgment dated 27.11.2000 and the conviction and sentenced awarded by the
trial Court has been affirmed. Hence, this revision has been filed.
5. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that taking into consideration the
nature of offence and the period of incarceration already suffered by the
applicant, the ends of justice would be met, if the jail sentence of the
applicants is reduced to the period already undergone.
6. The counsel for the State has supported the conviction and sentence
recorded by both the Courts below.
7 . Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and
on perusal of the impugned judgment and other material available on record,
it reflects that initially the applicants remained in custody from 15-12-1995
to 18-12-1995 and thereafter, after pronouncement of the judgment by the
trial Court the applicants remained in jail from 27-11-2000 to 06-12-2000 as
against the maximum sentence of 4 years awarded to them by the Courts
below. In such circumstances, taking into consideration the evidence
available on record and statements of the witnesses, in the considered view
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:1647
3 CRR-1561-2000
of this Court, the Courts below have not committed any error while
convicting the applicants for the aforesaid offences. Therefore, the
conviction of the applicants under Sections 148 and 326 and in the
alternative 326/149 of the Indian Penal Code recorded by the Courts below
is hereby affirmed.
8 . So far as sentence is concerned, the applicants have suffered
incarceration of about 14 days. In the facts and circumstances of the present
case, this Court is of the considered view, that the aforesaid sentence is
sufficient to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, the sentence of the
applicants is reduced to the period already undergone with fine as imposed
by the trial Court.
9. Accordingly, the revision stands disposed of. The conviction of the
applicants under under Sections 148 and 326 and in the alternative 326/149
of the Indian Penal Code is hereby affirmed. However, the sentence of the
applicants is reduced to the period already undergone i.e. 14 days. The
applicants are on bail. Their bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged.
10. Record of the Courts below be sent back immediately along with a
copy of this order for information and necessary action. A copy of this order
be also sent to the jail authorities concerned for information and necessary
action.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
ac
