Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1163/2016 of RAJKUMAR 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 RAJENDRA KUMAR VANION THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1163 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
1.RAJKUMAR S/O SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR SONI,AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O BIRLA MANDIR KEPICHE MOHAN NAGAR COLONY VRANDAWANROAD MATHURA (UTTAR PRADESH)AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O BIRLA MANDIR KEPICHE MOHAN NAGAR COLONY VRANDAWANROAD MATHURA (UTTAR PRADESH)
2.RAMSWAROOP S/O BADRI PRASAD SHARMA,AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O KATRA BAZARSABALGARH PRESENTLY R/O RAN SINGHCOLONY MANDI VIJAYPUR POLICE STATIONVIJAYPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O KATRA BAZARSABALGARH PRESENTLY R/O RAN SINGHCOLONY MANDI VIJAYPUR POLICE STATIONVIJAYPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI S.K. MISHRA - ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANTS
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION SABALGARH DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI GIRRAJ SONI - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR )
.....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.
ORDER
This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 (2) ofCr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.10.2016 passed by the FirstAdditional Sessions Judge, Sablagarh, District Morena in Session TrialNo.112/2010 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 427of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2000/- each and appellant Rajkumar has further been convicted underSection 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 1 year RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-with default stipulation.
2 In brief case of the prosecution case is that complainant Deenu @Deenanath lodged a report at Police Station Sablagarh, District Morena to theeffect that appellants committed Marpeet with him and destroyed variousarticles kept in his room on account of which he suffered various injuries andloss of Rs.18000/-. On his report Crime No.219/2009 was registered at PoliceStation Sablagarh, District Morena and appellants were arrested. Aftercompletion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court. Charges wereframed against accused persons which they denied and requested for trial. Aftertrial, appellants have been convicted under Section 427 of the I.P.C. andappellant Rajkumar has further been convicted under Section 324 of IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants/accused submitted that he does notwish to challenge the conviction of the appellants for the aforesaid offence. Asregards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants thatappellants have suffered one day jail sentence and they have been facing agonyof trial since 2009 for a period of near about 14 years. Therefore, it is prayedthat sentence of the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergonewhile enhancing the fine amount suitably.
4. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but hehas no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of therecord, it is found that trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence onrecord and rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 427 of I.P.C. and appellant Rajkumar under Section 324 of IPC, hence, conviction of theappellants under Section 427 of I.P.C. and appellant Rajkumar under Section324 of IPC needs no interference.
7. As regards sentence, looking to the facts and circumstances of thecase and evidence on record, in the considered opinion of this Court, ends ofjustice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the appellants to theperiod already undergone by them, the fine be enhanced to Rs.3000/- underSection 427 of I.P.C. for both the appellants and Rs.3,000/- under Section 324of IPC for appellant Rajkumar. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction ofthe appellants under Sections 427 of the I.P.C. and appellant Rajkumar underSection 324 of IPC, jail sentence o f the appellants is reduced to the periodalready undergone by them and fine amount is enhanced to Rs.3000/- underSection 427 of IPC for both the appellants and Rs.3,000/- under Section 324 ofIPC for appellant Rajkumar, which shall be deposited by them within a periodof two months from today, failing which the appellants will have to suffer thesentence as awarded by the trial Court. The fine amount if any, alreadydeposited by the appellants be adjusted against the aforesaid amount of fine.The entire amount of fine deposited by the appellants be paid to thecomplainant/injured as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
8. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of.
Ahmad
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)JUDGE