[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Roshan @ Manjhle vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2026
Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh
Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5875
1 CRA-649-2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 21st OF JANUARY, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 649 of 2009
ROSHAN @ MANJHLE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Mahendra Choubey - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Sanjeev Singh - Advocate for the respondent.
Ms. Seema Jaiswal - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
On the directions of this Court, the compromise statements were
recorded on 20.01.2026, and the report of the compromise has been received
from the Registrar (J-II).
2. As per the compromise report submitted by the Registrar (J II), the
statements of the appellant/accused, Roshan @ Manjhle (who appeared
through video conferencing), and the complainants Sadik Kuraisi and
Matlom Ali (who appeared in person), were recorded. In their statements,
they have expressed that they do not wish to prosecute the case any further,
having voluntarily arrived at an amicable compromise between themselves.
The identity of the parties were duly verified upon production of their
respective identity proofs.
3. Since Section 329 of the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable,
I.A. No. 29971/2025 stands dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5875
2 CRA-649-2009
4. Record is received.
5. This Criminal Revision was admitted on 06.04.2009.
6. With the consent of the learned counsel for the both the parties
matter is heard finally.
7. This Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure has been filed to set aside the judgment dated 22.09.2008 passed
in S.C. No.292/2008 (State of M.P. through P.s. Rahatgarh District Sagar Vs.
Roshan @ Manjhle) by the 7th Additional Session Judge, Fast Track Court,
District Sagar (M.P) whereby The learned trial acquitted the accused under
Section 327, 324 and 294 of IPC but convicted the accused under Section
329 (two counts) of IPC and sentenced him with five year R.I. and fine of
Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing his
appeal against the conviction, but the sentence may be reduced to the period
of custody already undergone by the appellant/accused.
9. Ms. Seem Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State,
and learned counsel for the respondent submit that they have no objection if
the conviction of the appellant is maintained and the sentence is reduced.
10. Considered the statement of PW/1-Matloom Ali, He stated that the
accused demanded money from him and, when he refused, he assaulted him
with a stick, as a result of which he sustained an injury on the thumb of his
right hand.
11. PW/2-Irfan, PW/3 Dr. Jinesh Diwakar, who stated there was a
fracture in metacarpal bone of right hand of complainant Matloom Ali.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5875
3 CRA-649-2009
12. PW/4-Dr. Rajeev Kumar Raikwar who also stated that he found a
cut injury on the thumb of right hand of the complainant Matloom Ali. He
also found a cut wound on palm of left hand.
13. PW/5- Dr.R.K.S Chouhan, PW/6-Lalji, PW/7- Sadiq, PW/8-Shahid
@Baba, PW/9-Guddu @ Munazid, PW/10-Jugal Kishor, Head Constable,
and also statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.
and also considered the statement of defense witness Ajeem. It is seen that
judgment of conviction as mentioned above is well justified. Therefore,
revision against conviction is dismissed.
14. Considered the quantum of sentence.
15. This appeal pertains to the year 2009. During the course of trial,
the appellant remained in custody from 21.06.2008 to 30.06.2008. After the
judgment dated 22.09.2008 passed in Sessions Trial No. 292/2008, this Court
granted suspension of sentence on 03.07.2009, and the appellant was
released on bail, which was verified on 10.07.2009.
16. In the considered view of this court in the fact and circumstance of
the case as narrated above and looking to the old pendency of this appeal, the
sentence can be reduced. Thus, the sentence is altered and modify to the
extent already undergone by the appellant in both the count. Further, the fine
imposed under Section 329 of the IPC is enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to
Rs.5,000/- (two counts). The amount if deposited previously shall be
adjusted. On depositing the fine amount Rs.4,000/- each to injured
person/complainant Sadik Kuraisi and Matlom Ali. If the fine amount is not
deposited, then the appellants shall undergo the sentence as awarded by the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5875
4 CRA-649-2009
learned trial court under default stipulation.
17. Jail sentence is reduced to the period of already undergone in both
the counts and
18. The learned trial Court shall release the amount and pay it to the
complainants.
19. As a result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.
20. Disposal of the case property would be as per the judgment of the
trial Court.
21. If the presence of the appellant is not required in any other case, he
will be released from the jail immediately. Let the original record of the trial
court be sent back to the concerned court.
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
NRJ
