Mohd.Hafeez Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 465 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mohd.Hafeez Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 May, 2025

Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal

Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21480




                                                              1                            CRR-1657-2025
                              IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
                                                    ON THE 7 th OF MAY, 2025
                                             CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1657 of 2025
                                                   MOHD.HAFEEZ KHAN
                                                          Versus
                                              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           Appearance:
                                   Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur - Advocate for the petitioner.

                                   Ms.Seema Jaiswal - P.L. appearing on behalf of respondent/State.

                                                                  ORDER

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of BNSS assailing judgement dated 05.04.2025 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Hatta District-Damoh, in Criminal Appeal No.08/2022, whereby petitioner's appeal, against judgment dated 03.02.2022, passed by the learned JMFC, Hatta, Damoh in R.C.T.No. 481/2017, has been dismissed and judgement passed by Trial Court convicting and sentencing petitioner under Section 429 of IPC and sentence of RI for 6 months each

(on three counts) with fine of Rs.200/- (each), with default stipulation has been affirmed.

2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that he is not challenging conviction part of judgment. He is only challenging sentence imposed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court on the ground that sentence imposed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court is

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21480

2 CRR-1657-2025 disproportionate to the offence allegedly proved against present petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per prosecution case, three buffaloes have died on account of driving of bus by petitioner at alleged date, time and place. It is also urged that in the instant case, incident is said to have occurred on 05.05.2017. There are no criminal antecedents of the present petitioner of identical nature. It is also urged that petitioner is in jail since 05.04.2025. Therefore, sentence imposed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court being disproportionate, the same be set aside and petitioner be sentenced with period already undergone and with fine as imposed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent/state has submitted that

prosecution has proved its case by leading cogent evidence & has proved guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt & there are no grounds to interfere with the same. The trial court has rightly convicted & sentenced the petitioner, as above. Hence, revision is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

6. So far conviction of petitioner under Section 429 of IPC is concerned, learned counsel for petitioner has not challenged the same. This Court has also examined testimonies of Devendra Patel (PW-1), Vishwanath Patel (PW-2), Premlal Gadariya (PW-3), Dr. Rakesh Sharma (PW-6), Rajendra Singh (PW-7), Hanumat Singh (PW-8), FIR (Ex.P/1) and medical report (Ex.P/6) and from aforesaid, conviction of petitioner under Section

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21480

3 CRR-1657-2025 429 of IPC appears to be justified and no interference is required in the same. Therefore, conviction of petitioner by trial court as well as appellate court is affirmed.

7. So far as sentence is concerned, learned trial Court as well as appellate Court has sentenced petitioner under Section 429 of IPC and sentenced with RI of 6 months for each of three counts and fine of Rs.200/- each, with default stipulation.

8. Present incident is dated 5.5.2017. There are no criminal antecedents of present petitioner of identical nature. Petition has undergone sentenced of more than one month, no minimum sentenced is prescribed under Section 429 of IPC.

9. Therefore, having regard to overall facts and circumstance of the case, in this Court's considered opinion, sentence of six months on each counts imposed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court appears to be disproportionate to the offence proved against present petitioner.

10. Hence, having regard to nature of offence as well as facts discussed in the preceding paras, ends of justice would be served, if petitioner is sentenced with the period already undergone and with enhanced fine amount.

11. Resultantly, petition filed by the petitioner is partly allowed and petitioner is sentenced under Section 429 of IPC with period already

undergone and with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default one month RI.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21480

4 CRR-1657-2025

12. This revision filed by the petitioner is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

13. Copy of order be sent forthwith to concerned jail for information and necessary action.

(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE sm