Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Kumar & Ors. vs The State Of M.P. on 17 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:46304
1 CRA-1577-2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 17th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1577 of 2004
MAHESH KUMAR & ORS. AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Ms. Aparna Singh - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Atul Dwivedi - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Pursuant to order dated 23.01.2023 passed by this Court, report dated
11.03.2023 has been received from the SHO of Police Station-Ichhawar,
District-Sehore wherein it is mentioned that appellant No.4 Devnarayan has
died on 07.09.2020. Death certificate of appellant Devnarayan is also
annexed with the report.
In view of the aforementioned, this criminal appeal stands abated so
far as it relates to appellant No.4 Devnarayan.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, arguments are
heard finally for appellant No.1 Mahesh Kumar, appellant No.2 Omprakash
and appellant No.3 Anaarsingh.
Appellants have preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2)
of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 26.08.2004 passed by the Special Judge, SC &
ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sehore (MP) in Special Case No.109/2003
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:46304
2 CRA-1577-2004
(State of MP Vs. Mahesh Kumar @ Others ), by which appellants have been
convicted for commission of offence under Section 323 (for causing injury
to Phool Singh) and Section 323 (for causing injury to Mangilal) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for six months with fine of Rs.1,000/- and RI for
four months with fine of Rs.500/- respectively, with default stipulations.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report
lodged, FIR bearing Crime No.154/2003 was registered against the
appellants/accused at Police Station-Ichhawar, District-Sehore for
commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC
and Section 3(1)(v) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After
completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court. Charges were framed against the appellants/accused.
Accused/appellants have 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
appellants guilty for commission of aforesaid offences and convicted
& sentenced them as mentioned preceding paragraph No.1. Being aggrieved
with the impugned judgment, the appellants have preferred this criminal
appeal before this Court.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits that
he does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellants recorded under
Section 323 (two counts) of IPC by the Trial Court, but has prayed for
reduction of jail sentence. It is submitted that the incident had taken place in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:46304
3 CRA-1577-2004
the year 2003 i.e. almost 22 years ago. It is submitted that appellants were in
custody from 13.06.2003 to 20.06.2003 (approximately eight days) during
trial. Thus, in total, appellants have served out the incarceration period of
approximately eight days so far in this case. Therefore, it is prayed that
appellants' jail sentence may be reduced/modified to the extent of period
already undergone by them as no fruitful purpose would get served by
sending them 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 appellants
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.
7 . Though, the appellants have not assailed the findings of conviction
on merits and have confined the submissions only to the question 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 appellants. Upon independent reappraisal, I find that the
conclusion so recorded by the trial Court is based on cogent reasoning and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:46304
4 CRA-1577-2004
does not suffer from any perversity or illegality warranting interference by
this Court. Accordingly, the findings of conviction of the appellants under
the aforesaid provisions of law are hereby affirmed.
8. However, considering the nature of the accusation, the period of
incarceration already undergone by the appellants and also the fact that
appellants are facing the agony for the last 22 years as the incident had taken
place in the year 2003, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice
would be met if the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellants is
reduced to the period already undergone by them by enhancing the fine
amount.
9. The conviction of appellant No.1 Mahesh Kumar, appellant No.2
Omprakash and appellant No.3 Anaarsingh for commission of offence under
Section 323 (two counts) of IPC, as recorded by the trial Court, is hereby
affirmed. However, the appellants' sentence as awarded by the Trial Court
for the alleged offences is modified and reduced to the period already
undergone by them so far by enhancing the fine amount. Thus, as far the jail
sentence of the appellants is concerned, it is modified and reduced to the
period already undergone by them by enhancing the amount from Rs.1,000/-
to Rs.5,000/- under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. as compensation in place of
'fine amount'. Thus, each of the appellant is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- as
compensation before the Trial Court. In total Rs.15,000/- shall be deposited
by all the appellants; out of which, Rs.5000/- - Rs.5,000/- to be paid to each
of the complainant(s)/victim namely Phool Singh and Mangilal as
compensation .
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:46304
5 CRA-1577-2004
10. Each of the accused/appellant(s) is directed to deposit the fine
amount as quantified by this Court before the Trial Court within a period of
two months from today. Fine amount, if any, already deposited shall be
adjusted. However, it is clarified that if fine amount as quantified by this
Court is not deposited within aforesaid period, appellants would surrender
themselves to serve out the jail sentence as awarded by the learned Trial
Court in default of payment of fine.
11. Appellants are on bail, their bail bonds shall stand discharged.
12. The order of the Trial Court with regard to the disposal of the
property is affirmed.
13. Learned Trial Court is directed to ensure the aforesaid
compliance.
14. This criminal appeal is disposed of to the extent indicated herein
above.
15. A copy of this order along with record of Trial Court be sent to
the Court concerned for information and necessary action.
16. Certified copy as per rules .
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
@shish
