Madhya Pradesh High Court
Banwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:26045
1 CRA-8429-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8429 of 2019
BANWARI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ishan Saluja - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Rajendra Kumar Suryawanshi appearing on behalf of the State.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6046 of 2019
RAHUL AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Vivek Singh, learned Senior counsel with Shri Rajesh Yadva, counsel for the
appellant.
Shri Rajendra Kumar Suryawanshi appearing on behalf of State.
Heard On: 02.09.2025
Delivered On: 11.09.2025
ORDER
1. Both these criminal appeals have been preferred against the
judgment dated 10.07.2019 pass in ST No.195/2016 by 5th Additional
Sessions Judge, Dhar District Dhar whereby the appellants in both the
appeals have been convicted under Section 148, 307 read with Section 149,
324 read with Section 149 and 323 read with Section 149 of IPC and have
been sentenced under Section 148 of IPC for 01-01 year R.I. with fine of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:26045
2 CRA-8429-2019
Rs.500/- each with default stipulation of one month additional R.I., under
Section 307 read with Section 149 of IPC (three counts) for 10-10 years R.I.
with fine of Rs.500/- each with default stipulation of one month additional
R.I., under Section 324 read with Section 149 of IPC for 01-01 years R.I.
with fine of Rs.5000/- each with default stipulation of one month additional
R.I. and no separate sentence has been awarded under Section 323 read with
Section 149 of IPC. All the sentences of all the accused persons /appellants
were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The appellants have been convicted and sentenced for making
unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons and attempting murder of
Bhurelal PW-4, Dinesh PW-7 and Mahesh PW-12 and causing voluntary
injuries to Mukesh PW-8, Dinesh PW-7 by sharp cutting object and causing
voluntary injuries to Vikram PW-1, Badri PW-2 and Dinesh PW-7, Bhurelal
PW-4 in furtherance of common object by unlawful assembly regarding
incident dated 22.03.2016 at about 8:30PM in village Gulwa, Police Station
Sagore District Dhar regarding which a crime No.48/2016 was registered at
Police Station Sagore District Dhar.
3. On claiming the trial and pleading innocence, prosecution examined
as many as 21 witnesses. In examination under Section 313 of Cr.p.C., 1973
all the facts and circumstances appeared against them were either denied or
ignorance was expressed. The defense submitted under Section 313(5) of
Cr.P.C., 1973 was that the construction of Shri Ram Temple was on
progress. Badri PW-2 was the President and Treasurer of Temple
Construction Committee. Appellant Banwari was performing the job of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:26045
3 CRA-8429-2019
white wash in the temple, he asked for payment of wages as his wife was ill.
Badri PW-2, Mukesh PW-8 misbehaved and Banwari expressed his
grievance before the villagers and the meeting was convened in this regard,
but PW-2 and PW-8 avoided the meeting and assembled to cause injury to
the accused persons and indeed, cause injures. They were the aggressors and
cause injuries to the appellant/accused Rajendra Jirati, Sandeep and Banwari.
Rajendre sustained fracture on his hand. Some unknown persons appeared
and injured of this case sustained the injuries.
4. Appreciating the evidence, the trial Court convicted and sentenced
the appellants as mentioned above in para no.1.
5. Challenging the conviction and sentence, these appeals have been
preferred before this Court.
6. During pendency of these appeals, a compromise was entered into
between the appellants of CRA No.6046/2019 and the victim Mahesh,
Bhurelal and Dinesh. The compromise was verified by the Principal Regisrar
of this Court on 19.12.2019. As per the verification report, appellant No.1
Rahul in CRA No.6046/2019 could not appear before the Principal Registrar
since, at that time, he was in jail and he was however, represented through
counsel. However, the offence under Section 307 is non-compoundable.
7. Considering the testimony of witnesses PW-1, PW-2, PW-4, PW-7,
PW-8, PW-12, PW-17, PW-18, S.I. PW-20 as well as report of Regional
forensic Science Laboratory, Indore Ex.P/49, the conviction of the appellants
does not requires interference of this Court and the same is hereby affirmed.
8. The compromise can be taken into consideration at the time of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:26045
4 CRA-8429-2019
considering the sentence only.
9. The appellant Rahul has already undergone 01year and 10 months,
Rajendra has undergone 02 months and 20 days, Shyamn has undergone 07
months, Sandeep has undergone 03 months, Pintu @ Pritam has undergone
three months and appellant Banwari has undergone 03 years and 10 months
out of their incarceration period.
10. Compromise may be taken into consideration for awarding
sentence. However, there is no compromise with Banwari, the appellant in
CRA No.8429/2019, but he has undergone a total period of three years, 09
months and 27 days till date. Therefore, considering the cause of incident,
their sentence is reduced to the period already undergone along with fine and
default stipulation. Accordingly, these appeals are partly allowed. Their bail
bonds stands discharged.
A copy of this judgment be placed in the record of connected criminal
appeal.
11. Copy of the judgment be forwarded to the trial court along with
record for compliance.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
amit
