[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok Rajak vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9853
1 CRA-8740-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 3 rd OF FEBRUARY, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8740 of 2019
ASHOK RAJAK AND OTHERS
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Alok Tiwari - Advocate for appellants appeared as amicus curiae.
Shri Anil Upadhyay - Panel Lawyer for respondent No.1/State.
Shri Mahendra Pateriya - Advocate for respondent No.2.
ORDER
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally
heard.
2. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C.
being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
23.09.2019 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Tikamgarh, District
Tikamgarh (M.P.) in SC ATR No.32/2017 whereby the present appellants
(hereinafter referred to as the 'accused persons') have been convicted under
Section 323/34 (two counts) and 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three
months RI each on each count and fine of Rs.500/- each on each count and one
year RI each and fine of Rs.1,000/- each respectively with default stipulations.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 11.01.2017, the complainant Sonu
Ahirwar filed a report at Police Station Lidhaura alleging therein that his house
and the house of the accused, Ashok, share a common wall. On 11.01.2017, while
he was constructing a wall on his rooftop, the accused, Ashok and Bablu, came
onto their rooftop and questioned why he was building a wall on their property.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9853
2 CRA-8740-2019
Following this argument, the accused Ashok struck him on the head with a stick
from his rooftop. He then came down, and the accused Ashok and Bablu
approached him with sticks. Ashok hit him on his right hand with a stick, and
when his brother Harishchandra came to his rescue, then the accused Bablu also
assaulted him with a stick and pushed his wife, Bhagwati, to the ground. The
accused Ashok then struck her with a stick. This report was recorded under Section
155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as a non-cognizable offence, which is
Exhibit P/1. During the investigation, the medical reports of the injured persons,
namely, Bhagwati, Sonu, and Harishchandra, were obtained (Exhibits P/11 to
P/13). Upon finding that the accused had committed offences under Sections 323,
324, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(VA) of the SC/ST Act, a
case was registered against them under these Sections vide Crime Number
No.04/2017, which is the First Information Report (Exhibit P/7), and the case was
taken up for investigation.
4. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet for the offences under
Sections 294, 323 (three counts) and 324 of IPC and Section 3(1)(da)(dha) of
SC/ST (POA) Act, was filed in the competent Court, which, on its turn,
committed the case to the Court of Sessions and from where it was received by the
trial Court for trial.
5. In order to bring home charges, the prosecution examined as many as 09
witnesses, namely, Sonu Ahirwar (PW-1), Ramlu Kewat (PW-2), Bhagwati
Ahirwar (PW-3), Harishchandra Ahirwar (PW-4), Kishorilal Kushwaha (PW-5),
Naseem Khan (PW-6), Durga Prasad Yadav (PW-7), Dr. Deepak Ojha (PW-8) and
R.K. Pendro (PW-9) and placed Ex.P/1 to P/15 the documents on record whereas
in defence, the accused persons have examined Pappu Rajak (DW-1) as defence
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9853
3 CRA-8740-2019
witness and placed Ex.D/1 to D/3 the documents on record.
6. The learned trial Judge on going through the evidence available in the charge
sheet framed charges against the accused persons under Sections 294, 323 (three
counts), 324 of IPC and Section 3(1)(da)(dha) of SC/ST (POA) Act, which they
denied and claimed to be tried.
7. The learned trial Judge after appreciating and marshalling the evidence vide
the impugned judgment has convicted the accused persons for commission of
offence punishable under Sections 323/34 (two counts) and 324/34 of IPC and
passed the order of sentence as mentioned in paragraph-1 of this judgment. In this
manner, the present appeal has been filed by the accused persons.
8. At the outset, Shri Alok Tiwari, Advocate appearing as amicus curiae on
behalf of the accused persons has submitted that he does not wish to challenge the
conviction of the accused persons/appellants for the aforesaid offences. As regards
custody, the accused persons, namely, Ashok Rajak and Bablu Rajak, were aged
about 38 and 32 years respectively at the time of commission of offence. The
incident occurred suddenly in a heat of passion in the year 2017 and since then
they been facing the ordeal of trial for a long period. They remained in custody for
one day as per the certificate under Section 482 of Cr.PC. Having regard to the age
of the accused persons at the time of the incident, the absence of any criminal
antecedents, the prolonged pendency of the proceedings since 2017 spanning
about 09 years and their cooperative conduct during trial and also the appeal, their
sentence of imprisonment may be set aside while enhancing the fine amount
suitably.
9. Per contra , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 has
opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the accused persons
contending that the accused persons have caused injuries to the victims, one of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9853
4 CRA-8740-2019
whom is a woman, and that they were taken into custody only for a period of one
day. He has further submitted that the findings recorded by the learned trial Court
are based on cogent, credible, and reliable evidence, and therefore do not warrant
any interference by this Court. Consequently, the present appeal deserves to be
dismissed.
10. Although, the learned counsel for the State has supported the impugned
judgment but he has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
12. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the
record, it is found that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence
on record and convicted the accused persons under Sections 323/34 (two counts)
and 324/34 of IPC, hence, conviction of accused persons under the aforesaid
Sections needs no interference.
13. As regards sentence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
38 and 32 years of age of the accused persons at time of incident of year 2017,
their cooperative conduct during trial and also during this criminal appeal, they are
the first offender and keeping in view the contention of learned counsel for the
accused persons, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would meet if
while reducing the jail sentence of the accused persons/ present appellants to the
period already undergone by them, the fine be enhanced under Section 323/34
(two counts) from Rs.500/- each on each count to Rs.1,000/- each on each count
and under Section 324/34 from Rs.1,000/- each to Rs.6,000/- each.
14. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the accused persons
under Sections 323/34 (two counts) and 324/34 of IPC, their jail sentence is
reduced to the period already undergone by them i.e. 1 day and the fine amount is
enhanced under Section 323/34 (two counts) of IPC from Rs.500/- each on each
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9853
5 CRA-8740-2019
count to Rs.1,000/- each on each count and under Section 324/34 of IPC from
Rs.1,000/- each to Rs.6,000/- each which shall be deposited by the accused
persons/ present appellants within a period of two months from today, failing
which the appellants will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial Court.
The fine amount, if any already deposited by the accused persons be adjusted
against the aforesaid amount of fine. The entire amount of fine deposited by the
present appellants be paid to the complainants/victims equally as compensation
under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
15. The present appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged.
16. The order of the trial Court pertaining to disposal of the property is hereby
affirmed.
17. Let record of the trial Court along with a copy of this order be sent back to the
concerned trial Court for information and necessary compliance.
18. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
ac/-
