Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bishen Singh @ Farukh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21575
1 CRA-12062-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 7 th OF MAY, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12062 of 2024
BISHEN SINGH @ FARUKH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Shailendra Singh Thakur - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Devendra Shukla - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. r/w 415
of B.N.S.S. against the judgment of conviction dated 08.12.2021 passed in
ST. No.201080/2016 by II Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhnadon, District
Seoni (M.P.) whereby learned Judge found the appellant guilty for the
offence punishable under Section 353 & 307 of the IPC and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for two years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and R.I. for seven years
with fine of Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulations.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
the offence was registered against the appellant at Crime No.102/2016 at
Police Station Ghansor, District Seoni for commission of offence punishable
under Section 353 & 307 of IPC. After completion of investigation, charge-
sheet has been filed before the competent Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21575
2 CRA-12062-2024
appreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found that the
appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 353 &
307 of the IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved with
the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal
before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up his challenge
to the findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellant is
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellant accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged
the quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that he will not involve in
such criminal activities in future. Appellant has suffered 06 years 08 months
& 04 days of imprisonment. He further submitted that having regard to all
circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction and further keeping in
view the fact that the appellant was facing the trial before the Trial Court
since 2016, jail sentence of appellant may be reduced suitably.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Trial Court has
rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant,
hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Trial Court has
rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21575
3 CRA-12062-2024
hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of
entire record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon
finding some force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
appellant.
8. Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the
finding of his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to
whether the findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable
or not, I perused the record and especially therein having so perused, I am
satisfied that no case is made out to interfere in the findings of the Court
below on merits. From the perusal of the record, it reveals that the findings
of the trial Court is based upon proper appreciation of oral and document
evidence, therefore, upheld the findings of conviction under Section 353 &
307 of the IPC recorded by the trial Court.
9. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant
and period of jail sentence already undergone by him which is 06 years 08
months & 04 days and the appellant was facing trial since 2016, I am of the
considered view that the ends of justice would be met if the appellant is
sentenced for the period already undergone by him by imposing fine amount.
10. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned
conviction is hereby maintained. However, the jail sentence imposed on
appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him and fine of
Rs.1,000/- is enhanced to Rs.3,000/-for each section, which shall be
deposited before the Trial Court within a period of one month from the date
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21575
4 CRA-12062-2024
of receipt of certified copy of this order. In default of payment of fine
amount within the stipulated period, the appellant shall suffer 1 month R.I.
Appellant is on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged.
11. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal
stands partly allowed and disposed of.
12. Let a copy of this order along with record be sent to the court
below for information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
mohsin
