Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raj Lallan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:43779
1 CRA-2040-2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD SHARMA
ON THE 10th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2040 of 2006
RAJ LALLAN SINGH AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Akhil Singh - Advocate for appellant Nos. 2 to 7.
Shri Lokesh Jain - GA for the respondent/State.
JUDGEMENT
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellant No.1 - Raj
Lallan Singh has died on 07-05-2025. He has also produced the death
certificate of the appellant No.1.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed having rendered infructuous with
regards to appellant No.1 as abated.
Heard on IA No. 20976/25, an application for condonation of non-
appearance of the appellants on 25-09-2024 on the ground of mis-
communication.
Looking to the ground mentioned in the application, same is allowed.
Non-appearance of the appellants on 25-09-2024 is hereby condoned.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
1. Appellants have preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section
374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated
10.10.2006 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST ( POA) Act, Rewa in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:43779
2 CRA-2040-2006
Special Case No. 24/2005 whereby appellants have been convicted under
Sections 447 and 323( for appellant No.2 only) of I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo RI for 3 months with fine of Rs. 500/- and RI for 06 months with
fine of Rs. 1000/- respectively with default stipulations.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants expressly gave up his challenge
to the findings of the trial Court so far as the conviction of the appellants are
concerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellants accepted the
finding of conviction passed against the appellants, however, they challenged
the quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that they will not involve in
such criminal activities in future. Appellants are in custody for one day
during trial. He further submitted that having regard to all circumstances
which resulted in appellants conviction and further keeping in view the fact
that the appellants are facing the trial before the concerned Court since 2005
and this appeal is also pending since 2006, jail sentence of appellants may be
reduced suitably.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the trial Court has
rightly found the appellants guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no
grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the
appellants, hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
4. 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
appellants.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:43779
3 CRA-2040-2006
5. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the appellants
and period of jail sentence already undergone by him which is of one day and
this appeal is pending since 2006, I am of the considered view that the ends
of justice would be met, if the appellants are sentenced for the period already
undergone by him by enhancing the fine amount.
6. Learned trial Court has duly appreciated the oral and documentary
evidence on record and has rightly come to the conclusion that appellants
have committed offence under Section 447 and 323 of IPC. There are no
reasons to interfere with the findings recorded by the trial Court. Therefore,
conviction of appellants for commission of offence under Sections 447 and
323 of IPC passed by the trial Court being just and proper is hereby affirmed.
7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned
conviction is hereby maintained. However, appellants are sentenced to the
period of jail sentence already undergone by him so far by enhancing the
fine amount. Thus, as far the jail sentence of the appellants are concerned, it
is modified and is reduced to the period already undergone by him by
enhancing the fine amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.2,000/- and from Rs. 1000/-
to Rs. 2,000/- each under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C as compensation in place
of 'fine amount'.
8. Appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation
amount as quantified by this Court before the trial Court within a period of
one month from today. The amount of fine if any, already deposited be
adjusted. However, it is clarified that if compensation amount as quantified
by this Court is not deposited within a period of one month from today,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:43779
4 CRA-2040-2006
appellants would surrender themselves to serve out the entire jail sentence as
awarded by the learned trial Court with default stipulations.
9. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds stand discharged.
10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal
stands partly allowed and disposed off.
11. 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.
(BHAGWATI PRASAD SHARMA)
JUDGE
PG
