Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1917/2022 of PRAMOD GHOSHI 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 JABALPUR
BEFOREHON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAFON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1917 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
PRAMOD GHOSHI S/O NIRANJAN GHOSHI, AGEDABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/OVILLAGE GADHOULI KHURD, P.S. MOTINAGAR, SAGAR,DISTRICT SAGAR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI SANJAY KUSHWAHA - ADVOCATE )
.....APPELLANT
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHPOLICE STATION MOTINAGAR DISTRICT SAGAR(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.VICTIM A S/O NOT MENTION OCCUPATION: NILLNOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY MS. SHIKHA BAGHEL - PANEL LAWYER )
.....RESPONDENTS
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
By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of CriminalProcedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction dated31.01.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,Sagar in Special Case No.201/2021 whereby the appellant has been convictedunder Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1year and fine of Rs.5000/- in default R.I. for 3 months and under Section 3(2)
(v-a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergoR.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/- in default, R.I. for 3 months.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that theprosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. During the trial,the appellant remained in custody from 09.05.2016 to 10.05.2016. He prayedfor acquittal of the appellant.
3 . Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Statesupported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved theincident and the learned Special Judge has rightly convicted the appellant underSections 12 of POCSO Act & under Section 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST Act.
4. After considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusal ofrecord, it appears that prosecutrix lodged a report on 07.06.2015 at P.S.Motinagar District-Sagar (M.P.) against the appellant which was registered asCrime No. 258/2016 under Sections 323, 354(A)(1)(i) of Indian Penal Code andunder Section 3(1)(XI) of SC/ST Act and Section 11/12 of POCSO Act. Afterinvestigation, charge-sheet was filed. The prosecution has examined 8witnesses. PW-1 (victim) proved the incident and the involvement of appellantin the offence. PW-2 (Ashish) and PW-3 (Kapanbai) also supported the case ofthe prosecution and after considering the statements of the witnesses an on thebasis of material available on record. The learned Special Judge vide jugmentdated 31.01.2022 convicted the appellant and sentenced as stated hereinabove.After examining the statements of the witnesses and record of the case, I do notfind any reason to interfere in the findings recorded by Special Judge which areduly based on due appreciation of evidence and consequently, the judgment ofconviction and conviction of the appellant are upheld.
5. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year
5. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2016, the prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedents of theappellant on record, the appellant remained in custody from 09.05.2016 to10.05.2016, there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section3(1)(v-a) of SC/ST Act, 1989 and/or Section 12 of the POCSO Act and thecomplainant has filed compromise application before the trial Court underSection 320 of Cr.P.C, I deem it proper to reduce the jail sentence of theappellant to the extent of the period which he has already undergone,accordingly, the jail sentence is reduced. However, fine is enhanced underSection 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST Act from Rs.500/- to Rs.5000/-. The appellant shalldeposit the enhanced amount of fine within a period of two months from todayand the fine amount be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section357 of Cr.P.C. The appellant is on bail, his personal bonds and bail bonds bedischarged. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.
6 . Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.
Shub
(VINAY SARAF)JUDGE