Dwarka Prasad Vs. the State of M.P.

Dwarka Prasad vs The State of M.P.

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Nov 21, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1038660

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1038660
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Nov 21, 2012
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dwarka Prasad

Respondent

The State of M.P.

Excerpt

.....gone through the judgment of the trial court as well as the record of the case. the trial court by placing reliance on the testimony of victim namely bhagirath (pw-1) and his son lallu (pw-2) and statement of dr. b.l. verma (pw-4) and medical report ex.p/4 has recorded a finding that offence under section 329 of the indian penal code is made out. the aforesaid finding is based on meticulous appreciation of evidence on record, which does not call for any interference. thus, the only question which arises for consideration is as to what sentence has to be awarded to the appellant to meet ends of justice.4. the incident took place on 30.3.1996. the appellant has already served jail sentence for a period of 7 months and 11 days i.e. from 2.4.1996 and 12.10.1996. there is nothing to suggest that the appellant is habitual offender. in the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of time which has elapsed, no useful purpose would be served in sending the appellant to jail again. accordingly, i set aside the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years awarded to the appellant for offence under section 329 of the indian penal code and 3 instead award the sentence for a period already undergone by him. however, the sentence of fine is hereby affirmed.5. with the above modification in the sentence, the appeal is partly allowed. (alok aradhe) judge rc 4

Full Judgment

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2047/1996 Dwarka Prasad Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh Counsel for the appellant : None Counsel for the resp./State : Shri Swapnil Gangully, Panel Lawyer. Present : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe

JUDGMENT

(21.11.2012) The appellant has been convicted under Section 329 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of amount of fine simple imprisonment for a period of three months, by the impugned judgment dated 12.10.1996 passed in Sessions Trial No.32/1996 by First Additional Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh.

2. The prosecution case is that on 30.3.1996 at about 10 p.m., when the victim namely Bagirath was at his field, the appellant went to him and demanded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. The appellant gave threat of life to the victim. Thereafter, the appellant assaulted the victim with lathi. The police after completing the investigation filed the charge- 2 sheet against the appellant for an offence under Section 327 read with 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The trial Court vide impugned judgment has convicted the appellant as aforesaid.

3. I have gone through the judgment of the trial Court as well as the record of the case. The trial Court by placing reliance on the testimony of victim namely Bhagirath (PW-1) and his son Lallu (PW-2) and statement of Dr. B.L. Verma (PW-4) and medical report Ex.P/4 has recorded a finding that offence under Section 329 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. The aforesaid finding is based on meticulous appreciation of evidence on record, which does not call for any interference. Thus, the only question which arises for consideration is as to what sentence has to be awarded to the appellant to meet ends of justice.

4. The incident took place on 30.3.1996. The appellant has already served jail sentence for a period of 7 months and 11 days i.e. from 2.4.1996 and 12.10.1996. There is nothing to suggest that the appellant is habitual offender. In the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of time which has elapsed, no useful purpose would be served in sending the appellant to jail again. Accordingly, I set aside the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years awarded to the appellant for offence under Section 329 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 instead award the sentence for a period already undergone by him. However, the sentence of fine is hereby affirmed.

5. With the above modification in the sentence, the appeal is partly allowed. (Alok Aradhe) Judge RC 4

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Dwarka Prasad vs The State of M.P. Same Subject Criminal