Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1707/2016 of ISHWAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGHON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1707 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
1.ISHWAR SINGH S/O MANSINGH PAL, AGEDABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMERVILLAGE MANGLIYA, P.S. MO. BADODIYA, DISTT.SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.OMPRAKASH S/O RAM BHAROSE, AGED ABOUT26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER VILLAGEMANGLIAY PS MO BADODIYA SHAJAPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER VILLAGEMANGLIAY PS MO BADODIYA SHAJAPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)
3.DHIRAPSINGH S/O HINDUSINGH, AGED ABOUT 38Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: FARMER VILLAGEMANGLIYA PS MO BADODIYA SHAJAPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: FARMER VILLAGEMANGLIYA PS MO BADODIYA SHAJAPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI MANISH KUMAR VIJAYWARGIYA, ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANTS
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSEOFFICER THRU. P.S. MO. BADODIYA, DISTT. SHAJAPUR(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI MUKESH SHARMA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
.....RESPONDENTS
This appeal coming on for orders 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.
JUDGMENT
This Criminal appeal has been filed under section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C.being aggrieved by judgement dated 24th November, 2016 passed by SpecialJudge, (Atrocities) Shajapur in ST No.60/14 whereby the appellants/accused have been convicted under section 323 r/w 34 of IPC and each of them havesentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six months respectively.
2. Facts of the case in brief are that appellants were prosecuted underSection 323 r/w 34, 294 & 506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Actarising out of a Crime No.185/2014 registered at P.S. Mo. Badodiya, Dist.Shajapur instituted on the report of Anokhilal. The allegations were that on21.05.2014 at about 12 Noon, the accused persons caused injuries to Anokhilal,Bherual and Kishanlal. Appellants/accused were put to trial where theappellants/accused abjured their guilt.
3 . Prosecution examined the complainant/injured Anokhilal as PW-1,injured Kishanlal as PW-2, injured Bherulal as PW-3, Investigating OfficerSDOP Suhash Dravid as PW-4, witness Shivprasad as PW-5, ASI H.S. Sohanias PW-6 and Medical Officer Dr. Manoj Pancholi as PW-7.
4 . The trial Court acquitted the appellants/accused from the chargesunder Section 294, 506 Part-II of IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of ScheduledCastes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, butconvicted the appellants/accused under Section 323 r/w 34 of IPC and each ofthem have sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six months only.
5 . Challenging the findings of conviction and sentence, this appeal hasbeen preferred mainly on the ground that the trial Court has committed error fornot extending the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the accused/appellantsand submitted the ground that when appellants/accused have been acquittedfrom other charges then on the same evidence, they cannot be convicted underSection 323/34 of the IPC also.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State has supported the conviction and sentence.
8. Falsus in uno and falsus in omnibus does not apply fully in India andperusal of testimony does not lead a ground to discard the testimony regardingthe conviction of the accused/appellants under Section 323 of IPC. So theconviction of the appellants/accused under Section 323 of IPC are affirmed.
9. Now we are considering on the quantum of sentence and extension ofbenefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to appellants/accused.
10. The trial Court has not recorded any reason not to extend the benefitof Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to appellants/accused.
1 1 . In this case, there is no criminal antecedent of theappellants/accused.They are facing the trial from 2014. Looking to the nature ofthe incident, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and thecharacter of appellants/accused as first offender, it is expedient to release themon probation of good conduct under section 4 of the Probation of OffendersAct, 1958.
12. The finding of the trial court regarding the sentence is modified andinstead of sentencing the appellants/accused at once it is directed thatappellants/accused be released on bail entering into bond with surety ofRs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the trialcourt within a period of 90 days to appear and receive sentence when calledupon by the trial Court during a period of 3 years and in the meantime to keepthe peace and be of good behavior.
13. Under Section 5 of Probation Of Offenders Act, 1958 theappellants/accused shall also pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only)each to the injured (1) Anokhilal S/o Dhisulal, Occ. Agriculture, Village:Adlim
Khedi, P.S. Mo. Badodiya, Dist. Shajapur, (2) Kishanlal S/o Chhitji, Occ.Agriculture, Village:Adlim Khedi, P.S. Mo. Badodiya, Dist. Shajapur, and (3)Bherulal S/o Rodulal, Occ. Agriculture, Village:Adlim Khedi, P.S. Mo.Badodiya, Dist. Shajapur, as compensation for the injury suffered for thecommission of offence. The appellants/accused shall deposit the compensationamount within 90 days failing which the said amount shall be recovered fromappellants/accused in accordance with law.
14. With the aforesaid, the criminal appeal is disposed off.
soumya
(GAJENDRA SINGH)JUDGE