CRA/1180/2014 of BASANT PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023

J U D G E M E N T

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 3/4/2014

passed by Special Judge, Rewa in Special Case No. 38/2013, whereby, theappellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 323 read withSection 34 of the IPC (on three counts) and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3months and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation.

2. The incident was reported to the Police Station Govindgarh, Distt. Rewa, where F.I.R. (Ex.P/2) was registered on Crime No.7/2013 under Sections 294,323, 506-B read with 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Act. Aftercompletion of investigation, charge sheet was filed. Learned trial Court videimpugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentionedherein above.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants challenging the finding of conviction and sentence submits that learned trial Court has ignored serious anomalies,contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of prosecution witnesses.Hence, prays for acquittal. In the alternative limb of prayer he submits thatduring trial appellants have remained in custody from 30/5/2013 o 4/6/2013 i.e.for 5 days. Incident took place near about a decade back. He has no criminalantecedents, therefore, taking lenient view jail sentence may be reduced to theperiod 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.for 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 offence u/s. 323 read with Section34 of the IPC is found to be clear, cogent and consistent. The same is free fromany material infirmity and anomaly. The testimony of complainant Gulabwati(PW/2) stands duly corroborated with first information report (Ex.P/1) and MLC report. Therefore, finding of conviction cannot be interfered and is herebyaffirmed.

7. As regards the sentence, the prayer made on behalf of the appellantsappears to be reasonable. The appellants faced trial and appeal during the longperiod of time. No criminal antecedents are attributed to the appellants,therefore, the period of jail sentence deserves to be reduced to the periodalready undergone without altering the fine amount.

8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction for the offenceunder Section 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC(on three counts) is affirmed.The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds and personal bonds standdischarged.

9. Let record of the learned trial Court along with the copy of the judgment ofthis Court forthwith be sent back for compliance and necessary action.

10. C.C. as per rules.

m/-

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)JUDGE