Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/481/2017 of BHAIRU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGHON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 481 of 2017
BETWEEN:-
1.BHAIRU S/O SHRI TULSIRAM MEENA, AGED 50YEARS, R/O AGRASEN COLONY SHEOPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.RANVEER S/O SHRI BHAIRU MEENA, AGED 30YEARS, R/O AGRASEN COLONY SHEOPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI PAWAN VIJAYVARGIYA - ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANTS
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION AJAAK, DISTT. SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI I.S. ASTHANA - PANEL LAWYER)
.....RESPONDENT
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, th e 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 criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed bythe appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated21.03.2017 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), District Sheopur inS.T.No.200072/2014, whereby the trial Court has acquitted both the appellantsunder Sections 294, 506 (part-2) and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act but hasconvicted appellant No.1-Bairu under Section 325/34 IPC and sentenced toundergo one year RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo three months RI with fine of Rs.200/- and appellant No.2-Ranveer has been convicted under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to undergoone year RI with fine of Rs.1,000 and under Section 323 IPC and sentenced toundergo three months RI with fine of Rs.200/-, with default stipulations.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the quarrel took placeon passing of the tractor from the field and raising objection to it. It is alsosubmitted both the appellants remained in custody for 2 days. He furthersubmits that his only prayer is that fine amount may be enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for the State has no objection if sentence ofappellants is converted to undergone.
4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
5. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal ofrecord and in considered view of this Court, conviction is affirmed but on thepoint of sentence, this appeal is partly allowed on the basis of sentenceundergone by both the appellants which is of 2 days, by setting aside jailsentence of the appellants, fine amount of both the appellants under Section 325IPC is enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.10,000/- each and under Section 323IPC is enhanced from Rs.200/- to Rs.1,000/- each and if fine amount asimposed by the trial Court has already been deposited by the appellants, samebe adjusted. If appellants deposit fine amount as directed hereinabove within aperiod of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, as thejail sentence of appellants has already been suspended, their bail bonds shallstand discharged and if they fails to deposit the fine amount, they have toundergo total jail sentence of four months. The fine amount of Rs.15,000/- begiven by the appellants to complainant-Hansraj as compensation.
6. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of and rest of the impugned judgment is kept intact.
7. Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned forinformation.
Adnan
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)JUDGE