Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1119/1999 of HEMRAJ SAHU AND ORS. Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAINON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1119 of 1999
BETWEEN:-
1.HEMRAJ SAHU S/O MANGAL PRASAD SAHU,AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/O 14/17 PREMSAGAR,THANA HANUMANTAL, JABALPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.MUNNA @ MUKESH S/O DASHRATH PRASADPATEL, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, PREMSAGARSAHU MOHALLA THANA HANUMANTAL,JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)PATEL, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, PREMSAGARSAHU MOHALLA THANA HANUMANTAL,JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(NONE FOR THE APPELLANTS)
.....APPELLANTS
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH :
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HANUMANTAL, JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI SOURABH SONI - PANEL LAWYER)
.....RESPONDENT
This appeal coming on hearing this day, t h e court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present appeal has been filed against the judgment of convictiondated 15.04.1999, whereby the present appellants have been convicted foroffence under Section 324 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for threeyears each, with default stipulation.
2 . The prosecution case in brief is that the incident occurred on18.03.1997 when the complainant was returning home at around 11.15 pm in the night. The appellant No.2 - Munna is said to have called out to him. When thecomplainant went there, then he saw the other accused persons were alsopresent there and as soon as the complainant reached the place, the accusedSaddu assaulted him on head with a sharp edged object, accused Hemraj triedto stab him in chest, which was dodged by the complainant, but the knife hithim in left wrist. Accused Munna also stabbed him on left wrist. When hescreamed for help then persons from neighborhood reached and rescued him.
3. The accused persons were initially tried under Section 307 of theI.P.C., but accused Saddu has been convicted under Section 326 and accusedHemraj and Munna have been convicted under Section 324 of the I.P.C.
4 . Upon perusal of deposition of Kaushal (PW/1), Dr. Maya Verma(PW/10), Dr. Y.R. Yadav (PW/8), Shyamlal Sahu (PW/2) and other witnessesfinding of the trial Court seems to be well reasoned and impeccable and I amunable to disturb the findings in appeal. Thus, the conviction of the appellants isconfirmed.
5. The sentence needs to be modified looking to the mitigating circumstances of the case. The appellants were 19 and 23 years of age at thetime of incident and no further criminal record has been shown against theappellants. The appellants were on bail during investigation and trial and they areon suspension of sentence during the pendency of present appeal. There isnothing on record to suggest that they have misused the terms of bail during allthese years. The appellants have already undergone jail sentence of 20 and 18days respectively. They have been facing investigation and trial and are alsocontesting the present appeal since last about 24 years.
6. Considering the aforesaid mitigating circumstances, I deem it fit to reduce the jail sentence to one already undergone by the appellants and the fineamount Rs.5,000/- each is imposed.
7. Let the fine amount be paid within three months from today failingwhich sentence originally awarded by the trial Court would come into force andthe appellants will be taken into custody to serve out the remaining jail sentence.
8. Let record of the trial court be sent along with copy of this order forinformation and necessary action. Bail bonds of the appellants be discharged.
rj
(VIVEK JAIN)JUDGE