Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/680/2017 of RAVINDRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANION THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 680 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
RAVINDRA S/O SHRI OMPRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 21YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O GAUTAM VIHARCOLONY, DABRA, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI DEVENDRA CHOUBEY - ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION DABRA, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI ATUL SHARMA - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR )
.....RESPONDENT
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed thefollowing:
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
This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 (2) ofCr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.05.2017 passed by theSecond Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior in Session TrialNo.06/2016 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 451 and323 of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo six months and three monthsrigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and Rs.500/- with defaultstipulation.
2 Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submitted that he does notwish to challenge the conviction of the appellant for the aforesaid offence. As regards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant thatappellant has suffered 6 days jail sentence and he has been facing agony of trialsince 2015 for a period of near about 8 years. Therefore, it is prayed thatsentence of the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone whileenhancing the fine amount suitably.
3. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but he has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the record, it is found that trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence onrecord and rightly convicted the appellant under Section 323 and 451 of theI.P.C. hence, conviction of the appellant under Sections 323 and 451 of theI.P.C. needs no interference.
6. As regards sentence, looking to the facts and circumstances of thecase and evidence on record, in the considered opinion of this Court, ends ofjustice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the appellant to theperiod already undergone by him, the fine be enhanced to Rs.1000/- underSection 323 and Rs.2000/- under Section 451 of the I.P.C. Accordingly, whileaffirming the conviction of the appellant under Sections 323 of the I.P.C. and451 of the I.P.C. jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period alreadyundergone by him and fine amount is enhanced to Rs.1000/- under Section 323and Rs.2000/- under Section 451 of the I.P.C. for the offences which shall bedeposited by him within a period of two months from today, failing which theappellant will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the trial Court. The fineamount if any, already deposited by the appellant be adjusted against the aforesaid amount of fine. The entire amount of fine deposited by the appellantbe paid to the complainant/injured as compensation under Section 357 ofCr.P.C.
7. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
Ahmad
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)JUDGE