CRA/3105/2021 of NARESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL

ON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3088 of 2021

BETWEEN:-

NARENDRA S/O RAMCHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,OCCUPATION: LABOUR 14/3, MAILI GALI, BAHADURGANJ,(MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT

(MR. DHARMENDRA KEHARWAR, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT)

AND

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICERTHRU. P.S. KHARAKUNWA, DISTRICT-UJJAIN (MADHYAPRADESH(MS. MEHUL SHUKLA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)

.....RESPONDENT

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3105 of 2021

BETWEEN:-

NARESH S/O RAMESHCHANDRA SHRIVASTAVA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AUTO DRIVER ABDALPURA BRAHMAN GALI, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT

(MR. DHARMENDRA KEHARWAR, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT)

AND

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THRU. P.S. KHARAKUNWA, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

….RESPONDENT

(MS. MEHUL SHUKLA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)

This appeal coming on for orders this day, the court passedthe following:

J UD G M E N T

With the consent of counsel for the parties, matter is finallyheard.

(2) This order shall govern the disposal of Criminal AppealNo.3088 of 2021 (Narendra vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh)and Criminal Appeal No.3105 of 2021 (Naresh vs. The State ofMadhya Pradesh) arising out of common judgment dated24.03.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No.16/2021 passed by FifthAdditional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, convicting and sentencing theappellants under Section 379 of IPC with RI of six months.

(3) Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, hassubmitted that he is not challenging the impugned judgment onmerits but is confining his arguments with respect to sentenceonly.

(4) I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and haveperused the record of the case.

(5) So far as the conviction is concerned, I have gone throughthe evidence adduced by the prosecution and impugned judgmentpassed by learned trial Court. Perusal of the same reveal thatlearned trial Court has rightly convicted appellants as above andfindings recorded by the trial Court are well founded. Hence,findings of trial Court with respect to conviction of appellants are Arun/- hereby affirmed.

(6) So far as sentence is concerned, offence proved against theappellants with respect to theft of pairs of gold tops. There are nocriminal antecedents against the appellants. The appellant - Nareshhas remained in custody from 25.08.2020 to 28.08.2020 andappellant – Narendra has remained in custody from 25.08.2020 to02.09.2020. Appellant – Naresh is aged about 43 years whereasappellant – Narendra is aged about 44 years.

(7) In view of above and considering over all facts andcircumstances of the case, including the nature of offence, appealsfiled by appellants are partly allowed. The appellants aresentenced under Section 379 of IPC with the period alreadyundergone and with fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default inpayment of fine, three months RI.

(8) The appellants are directed to deposit the aforesaid amountwithin three months from today failing which they shall surrenderbefore the trial Court to undergo remaining sentence ofimprisonment imposed by trial Court. Fine amount, if anyalready deposited, shall be adjusted against the enhanced fineamount.

(8) With the aforesaid, the appeal stands partly allowedto theextent as indicated herein above.

(9) Certified copy, as per Rules.

(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL) J U D G E

4