CRA/247/2016 of RAM LAKHAN CHATURVEDI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023

ORDER

This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. againstthe judgment of conviction dated 21.12.2015 passed by the Learned SpecialJudge, Satna in S.C.No.02/2011. whereby learned Judge found the appellantguilty for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC and directed tosuffer R.I. for six months with fine of Rs.3,000/- with default stipulation.

2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,Crime No.841/2009 was registered against the appellant at Police Station Tala,District Satna for commission of offence punishable under Sections 325/34,323/34, 294 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of the SC/ST Act. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competentCourt.

3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses andappreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court has acquitted theappellant from the offence punishable under Section 294 and 323/34of IPC andSection 3(1)(X) of the SC/ST Act and found him guilty for commission ofoffence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC and sentenced him asmentioned above. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the appellanthas preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up his challenge tothe findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellant isconcerned. In other words, learned counsel for the appellant accepted thefinding of conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged thequantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellant is the onlyearning person in his family, he is the first offender and counsel assures that hewill not involve in such criminal activities in future. It is also submitted that inthe same incident, there is cross-case registered against Triveni Prasad Saket inS.T.No.67/2012, a copy of the judgment dated 21.12.2015 is also filed asAnnexure A/1, wherein accused has been convicted under Section 447 of theIPC with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation. He further submitted thatlooking to the facts and circumstances of the case, appellant can be punishedwith fine only. It is also submitted that having regard to all circumstances whichresulted in appellant's conviction and further keeping in view the fact that theappellant was facing the trial before the concerned Court since the date of hisincarceration, therefore, he prayed that his jail sentence be reduced suitably.

5. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has submitted that afterappreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below haverightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, nogrounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant,hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entirerecord of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding someforce in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

7. Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the finding ofhis conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether thefindings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perusedthe record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no caseis made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From theperusal of the record, it reveals that the findings of the trial Court is based uponproper appreciation of oral and document evidence, therefore, upheld thefindings of conviction under Section 325 of the IPC recorded by the trial Court.

8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant,natures of the substance, its quantity and period of jail sentence alreadyundergone by him and this appeal is pending since 2016 and the appellant isfacing trial since 2011, I am of the considered view that the ends of justicewould be met if the appellant is sentenced for till rising of the Court and someenhancement in the fine amount.

9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned convictioni s hereby maintained. However, the jail sentence imposed on appellant isreduced to the period till rising of the Court and the appellant will surrenderbefore the trial Court to undergo the sentence till rising of the Court and deposit the fine amount within a period of 45 days and the sentence of fine isenhanced from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.8,000/-. In default of payment of enhanced fineamount, the appellant shall suffer 3 month R.I. He be released forthwith, subjectto payment of fine and if not required in any other case. Amount of fine, if any,deposited earlier shall be adjusted.

10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal standspartly allowed and disposed of.

11. Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the court belowfor information and necessary compliance.

12. The enhanced fine amount shall be deposited by the appellant withina period of 45 days from today.

Certified copy as per Rules.

sh

(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)JUDGE