Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/588/2014 of UDAYBHAN SAKET Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPURBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAFON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 588 of 2014
BETWEEN:-
UDAYBHAN SAKET S/O SHRI PARMESHWAR SAKET,AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, NAUGAWNA P.S. AMAR PATANDISTRICT-SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI AJAY TAMRAKAR-AMICUS CURIAE)
.....APPELLANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH P.S. AMARPATANSATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI G.S. THAKUR-GOVT. ADVOCATE )
.....RESPONDENTS
This appeal coming on for hearing. this day, the 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.
JUDGMENT
By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of CriminalProcedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and order ofsentence passed by Upper Session Judge, Amarpatan District Satna in S.T.No.226/2009 on 22.1.2014 whereby the appellant has been convicted underSection 324 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo one year R.I. andfine of Rs.1000/- and in default, to further undergo one month S.I.
2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar,Advocate who is present in the Court has been requested to assist the Court onbehalf of the appellant as amicus curiae.
3. The learned amicus curiae has submitted that the prosecution failed toprove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial, the appellantremained in custody from 17.3.2009 to 4.6.2009. He prayed for acquittal of theappellant.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Statesupported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved theincident and the learned sessions Court has rightly convicted the appellantsunder Section 324 of Indian Penal Code.
5. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal of record, it appears one Vansroop Saket lodged a report at P.S. AmarpatanDistrict Satna on 11.3.2009 registered as Crime No.52/2009 against theappellant undere Section 307 of the IPC and after investigation charge sheet wasfiled. Prosecution examined nine witnesses. PW 4- Vansroop and PW 5-Sunitaduly supported the prosecution case and narrated the incident and involvementof the appellant in the offence and their statement were supported by PW 1-Natthu, PW 3-Jugal Kishor, PW 7- Asha Rani. The injury sustained by Sunitawere duly explained by PW9-Dr. B.J. Bhadoriya. Learned Sessions Judge afterconsidering the witnesses and the material available on record by judgmentdated 22.1.2014 convicted the appellant under Section 324 of the IPC andsentenced as stated herein above. The findings recorded by the learnedSessions Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not requireany interference of this Court. The judgment of conviction and conviction underSection 324 of the IPC are upheld.
6. However looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year2009, the appellant remained in custody from 17.3.2009 to 4.6.2009, theprosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of the appellants on record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section324 of Indian Penal Code, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of theappellant to the extent of the period which he has already undergone andaccordingly, the jail sentence is reduced and the fine amount is maintained. Theappellants is on bail, his personal bond and bail bond be discharged.Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.
7. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of thejudgment.
P/-
(VINAY SARAF)JUDGE