Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/6733/2022 of YASHPAL CHOUDHARY 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 BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDION THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6733 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1.YASHPAL CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI MITHAILALCHOUDHARY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O BAMHOUR POLICESTATION NAGOD DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYAPRADESH)CHOUDHARY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O BAMHOUR POLICESTATION NAGOD DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.ACCHELAL BASDEVA S/O SHRI RAMAVTARBASDEVA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:LABOUR R/O BAMHOUR POLICE STATIONNAGOD DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI DEVENDRA KUMAR SHUKLA - ADVOCATE )
.....APPELLANTS
ANDTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION NAGOD DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI B.K. UPADHYAY - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
.....RESPONDENT
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, th e 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
This appeal is directed aged the judgment and order dated 19.07.2022passed by Special Judge Electricity, Nagod, District Satna, in SC ELE/04/2018whereby, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 379of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- and Section 139 of Electricity Act and have been sentenced to fine of Rs.
2000/- with default stipulation.
2. The incident relating to theft of transformer parts was reported to thePolice Station Nagod District Satna where FIR (Ex. P/1) was registered onCrime No. 57/16 under Section 379 of IPC and Section 136 and 139 ofElectricity Act. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.Learned trial Court vide impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced theappellants as mentioned herein above.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants challenging the finding of convictionand sentence submits that the learned trial Court ignored serious anomalies,contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of prosecution witnessesand prays for acquittal. In the alternative limb of prayer he submits thatappellant No. 1 Yashpal Choudhary has remained in jail from 11.02.2016 to 22.02.2016 i.e. 11 days and appellant No.2 Achhelal Basdeva has remained injail from 11.02.2016 to 24.02.2016 i.e. 13 days. No other criminal case isregistered against them, therefore, taking lenient view jail sentence may bereduced to the period already undergone.
4. Learned counsel for the State supports the impugned judgment and praysfor dismissal of this appeal stating that it is devoid of merits.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
6. The evidence adduced in support of the allegation with regard to offenceu/s. 379 of IPC and Section 139 of Electricity Act, 2003 is fond to be clear,cogent and consistent. The same is free from any material infirmity andanomaly. The testimony of prosecution witnesses stands duly corroboratedwith the FIR (Ex. P/1), therefore, finding of conviction cannot be interfered andis hereby affirmed.
7. As regards the sentence, the prayer made on behalf of the appellants appears to be reasonable. The appellant No. 1 has remained in jail from11.02.2016 to 22.02.2016 i.e. 11 days and appellant No.2 has remained in jailfrom 11.02.2016 to 24.02.2016 i.e. 13 days. No criminal antecedents areattributed to the appellants, therefore, the period of jail sentence deserves to bereduced to the period already undergone.
8 . Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of theappellants is affirmed. Jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone.The fine amount imposed for offence under Section 379 of IPC is enhancedfrom Rs. 500/- to 5000/- to each of the appellants. Similarly fine amount foroffence under Section 139 of Electricity Act is also enhanced from 2000/- to5000/- to each of the appellants. Appellants will have to deposit the remainingenhanced amount of fine within a period of two months from the date ofjudgment passed by this court before the concerned trial Court failing which theappellants will have to undergo RI for the three months. The appellants are onbail. Their bail bonds and personal bonds stand discharged.
9. Let record of the learned trial Court along with the copy of the judgment of this Court forthwith be sent back for compliance and necessary action.
10. C.C. as per rules.
L.R.Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2023.12.29 16:31:07 +05'30'
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)JUDGE