Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jaypal Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52394
1 CRA-2210-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 15th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2210 of 2012
JAYPAL SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Chandrapal Singh Parmar - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Deepak Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 16.08.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Pawai, District-Panna (MP) in Sessions Trial No.52/2010 ( State of MP Vs.
Jaypal Singh & Others), by which appellant has been convicted for
commission of offence under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo
RI for three months with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report
lodged, FIR bearing Crime No.49/2009 was registered against the
appellant/accused at Police Station-Pawai, District-Panna (MP) for
commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 327, 435, 506
part-II, 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been
filed before the competent Court. Charges were framed against the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52394
2 CRA-2210-2012
appellant/accused. Accused/appellant has refuted the charge and claimed to
be tried. Statements of the witnesses were recorded.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
appreciating the evidence led by the parties, learned Trial Court found the
appellant guilty for commission of aforesaid offences and convicted
& sentenced them as mentioned in preceding paragraph No.1. Being
aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred this
criminal appeal before this Court.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
he does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellant recorded under
Section 323 of IPC by the Trial Court, but has prayed for reduction of jail
sentence. It is submitted that the incident had taken place in the year 2009 i.e.
almost 16 years ago. It is submitted that appellant was in custody from
10.04.2009 to 18.06.2009 during trial. Thus, in total, appellant has served out
the incarceration period of approximately two months & eight days so far in
this case. Therefore, it is prayed that appellant's jail sentence may be
reduced/modified to the extent of period already undergone by him as no
fruitful purpose would get served by sending him behind the bars again.
5. Learned counsel for the State has supported the findings recorded
by the Trial Court and has submitted that after appreciating the evidence
produced by the prosecution, the Trial Court has rightly found the appellant
guilty for the aforesaid offence and has prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52394
3 CRA-2210-2012
7 . Though, the appellant has not assailed the findings of conviction
under Section 323 of IPC on merits and has confined the submissions only to
the quantum of sentence; this Court, is nonetheless under a legal obligation
to scrutinize the correctness and sanctity of the conviction recorded by the
trial Court. On this aspect, I have carefully perused the judgment of the trial
Court and the evidence adduced during trial. The prosecution case is not only
corroborated by the testimony of the witnesses, but also stands duly
supported by other materials placed on record. The trial Court, while
appreciating the entire evidence in its proper perspective, has arrived at a
well-reasoned finding of guilt against the appellant. Upon independent
reappraisal, I find that the conclusion so recorded by the trial Court is based
on cogent reasoning and does not suffer from any perversity or illegality
warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the findings of
conviction of the appellant under the aforesaid provisions of law are hereby
upheld.
8. However, considering the nature of the accusation, the period of
incarceration already undergone by the appellant and also the fact that
appellant is facing the agony for the last 16 years as the incident had taken
place in the year 2009, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice
would be met if the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant is
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
9. Thus, the conviction of appellant under Section 323 of IPC, as
recorded by the trial Court, is hereby affirmed. However, the appellant's
sentence as awarded by the Trial Court for the alleged offences is modified
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52394
4 CRA-2210-2012
and reduced to the period already undergone by him so far. Thus, as far the
jail sentence of the appellant is concerned, it is modified and reduced to the
period already undergone by him.
10. The appellant is directed to deposit the fine amount as imposed
by the Trial Court within a period of one month from today (if already not
deposited). Fine amount, if any, already deposited shall be adjusted.
However, it is clarified that if fine amount as imposed by the Trial Court is
not deposited within aforesaid period, appellant would surrender himself to
serve out the jail sentence as awarded by the learned Trial Court in default of
payment of fine.
11. Appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand discharged.
12. Learned Trial Court is directed to ensure the aforesaid
compliance.
13. This criminal appeal is disposed of to the extent indicated herein
above.
14. A copy of this order along with record of Trial Court, if available,
be sent to the Court concerned for information and necessary action.
15. Certified copy as per rules .
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
@shish
