Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dinesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19596
1 CRR-3387-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 28th OF JULY, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3387 of 2025
DINESH AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Somesh Gobhuj - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri S.S. Thakur - G.A. for the State.
ORDER
This criminal revision is preferred by the revision petitioners under
sections 438 read with section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 being aggrieved by judgment dated 17.07.2025, passed by the Court of
First Additional Session Judge, Barwah, District- (Mandleshwar) (M.P.)
passed in Criminal Appeal No.73/2024, affirming the judgment passed on
13/11/2024 in RCT No.263/ 2021 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Barwah, District-Mandleshwar (West-Nimar) (M.P.) convicting the present
petitioners under sections 323, 325 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
and has sentenced (rigorous imprisonment under sections 323 R/w 34 of IPC
for 3 months double count and fine amount of Rs. 500 for every count), and
also convicted under sections 325 R/w 34 of IPC for 6 months of Rigorous
imprisonment and amount of fine of Rs.1,000/-.
2. The conviction of the revision petitioners under section 323/34 of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19596
2 CRR-3387-2025
the IPC of causing injuries to Gulabh Bai (PW-1) and Kuldeep (PW-5) and
conviction under section 325/34 of the IPC for causing voluntarily grievous
injuries to Dhyan Singh (PW-2) is maintained.
3. Heard.
4. Perused the record.
5. Now revision petitioners are considered on the quantam of sentence,
incident occurred for the excreta of hens that were in the poultry farm for
manure giving. The revision petitioners have undergone 11 days and in
considering the short sentence passed against the revision petitioners shall
not serve any purpose when they have no criminal antecedents. Therefore, in
the light of Mukesh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2016(3) MPWN 274,
Lakhanlal @ Lakhan Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh Home 2019 (2) JLJ
457 and considering the nature of offence and circumstances of the case and
accused being first offender it is a fit case where the benefits of Section 4 of
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can be extended to accused Dinesh, Basant
and Ritik.
6. Therefore, instead of directing the accused Dinesh, Basant and
Ritik at once to undergo imprisonment, it is being directed that accused
Dinesh, Basant and Ritik shall be released under the provisions of Section 4
of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on probation of good conduct for a
period of three years subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the
amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) each to the effect that
they shall keep peace and be of good behaviour during the said period of
three years and shall appear to receive sentence when called upon by the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19596
3 CRR-3387-2025
court.
7. Under Section 5 of Probation Of Offenders Act, 1958 the accused
Dinesh, Basant and Ritik shall also pay Rs.10,000/-(Rs.Ten Thousand only)
each to Dyan Singh (PW-2) compensation for the injury caused to Dyan
Singh (PW-2) by the commission of the offence. The accused Dinesh,
Basant and Ritik shall deposit the compensation amount within 30 days
failing which the said amount shall be recovered from them in accordance
with law.
8. In view of the aforesaid, criminal revision is partly allowed and
disposed off.
9. Copy of the judgment be supplied to Dyan Singh (PW-2).
10. Record of the trial court be remitted back.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
ajit
