Judgment:
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K.Gupta,J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.381 OF 200.Subhash Singh & others. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Anil Dwivedi, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT
(Delivered on the 6th day of November, 2012) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25/1/2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Betul in ST No.45/1996, whereby the appellants were convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 323/149 of IPC and sentenced for six months' RI with fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine amount, two months' SI was directed. Also the appellants No.2, 3, 5 and 11 are convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 148 of IPC and sentenced for six months' RI with fine of Rs.800/- each and in default of payment of fine amount, three months' SI was directed, whereas the appellants No.4 & 7-10 were convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 147 of IPC and sentenced 2 Cr.A.No.381/2000 for six months' RI with fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine amount, two months' SI was directed. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 28.5.1995 at about 10:30 AM in the morning the complainant Ramkishan who was resident of Village Chudiya (Police Station Chicholi District Betul) went to Panchayat house and got the identity card prepared for his daughter Basanti Bai. Thereafter the appellant Subhash Patel came to the spot and directed the complainant Ramkishan not to get the identity card prepared for his daughter Basanti Bai, because she was under age. He tried to snatch the application form. The complainant went outside of the Panchayat house due to annoyance. Thereafter the appellants went behind him along with farsa, ballam, gupti, pistol and sticks. They assaulted the complainant Ramkishan. The witnesses Imrat, Talak and Babu tried to save the complainant, but they also sustained injuries caused by the appellants. Ultimately, the injured persons were taken to the Police Station Chicholi where the complainant had lodged an FIR Ex.P-1. The injured persons were sent for their medico legal examination. They sustained simple injuries. After due investigation, a charge 3 Cr.A.No.381/2000 sheet was filed before the JMFC Betul, who committed the case to the Sessions Court, Betul.
3. The appellants-accused abjured their guilt. They took a specific plea that they were falsely implicated in the matter due to political enmity. In defence Kunjilal (DW-1) and Dr. MAB Ansari (DW-2) were examined.
4. The learned Sessions Judge, Betul after considering the evidence adduced by the parties convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned above.
5. The appellants No.1 and 12 have expired during the pendency of this appeal, and therefore their names were deleted from the cause title of the appeal.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the appellants do not want to challenge their conviction directed by the trial Court, but they pray for reduction of the sentence. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants have faced the trial and the appeal for last 16 years. No one sustained any grievous injury, and therefore the overt-act of the appellants was not so grave that they could be sent to the jail. They remained in the custody for few days during the trial, and therefore they may not be 4 Cr.A.No.381/2000 sent to the jail again. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants appears to be correct. Looking to the overt-acts of the appellants, the fact that they have faced the trial and the appeal for last 16 years and they were the first offender, it is a good case in which the jail sentence can be reduced to the period which they have already undergone in the custody by imposing fine amount upon the appellant.
8. On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal of the present appellants is partly allowed. The conviction directed for the offence under Sections 323/149, 148 or 147 of IPC is hereby maintained, but the jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to the period which they have already undergone in the custody. However, each of the appellants is imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 323/149 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, each of the appellants shall undergo for two months' SI. No change in the fine amount imposed for the offence punishable under Section 148 or 147 of IPC. The appellants are directed to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court within two months from today.
9. At present the appellants are on bail, and therefore their presence is no more required before this 5 Cr.A.No.381/2000 Court. It is directed that their bail bonds shall stand discharged.
10. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court along with its record for information and compliance. (N.K.Gupta) Judge 06/11/2012 Ansari.