Skip to content


Durga Prasad and ors. Vs. the State of M.P. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Subject

Criminal

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Case Number

Criminal Appeal No. 994/1999.

Judge

Acts

Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 323

Appellant

Durga Prasad and ors.

Respondent

The State of M.P.

Excerpt:


.....challenged the finding of conviction of the appellant but confined his arguments only on the point of sentence. so there is no need to consider the facts of the case. 3. learned counsel for the appellants submitted that out of 13 persons who were tried, these three appellants have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid, the appellants are first offender and there is no criminal record against them. the incident is of the year 1993. therefore, their case may be considered 2sympathetically. he submits that alleged offence under section 323 ipc is punishable with fine alone also. 4. on the contrary, learned counsel for the state has supported the judgment delivered by the trial court and contended that no interference is called for in this appeal. 5. keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and submissions made by the parties, the interest of justice would be served if the amount of fine is enhanced in lieu of sentence.  consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. the conviction of the appellants by the trial court is hereby maintained. however, instead of jail sentence, i impose extra fine amount of rs.1,000/-(rs. one thousand only) on each appellant. the.....

Judgment:


1. Perused PUD dated 30/04/11 in which it has been shown that appellants have failed to appear before the trial Court on 23.04.11.

Learned counsel for appellants submits that matter may be heard finally today to which learned PL for State has no objection.

Heard finally.

This is an appeal preferred by the appellants feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 22.03.99, delivered by the then Special Judge, Raisen in Special Case No.158/96 in which appellants have been 1convicted for alleged offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to R.I.for six months and fine of Rs.500/- each, in default of payment of fine appellants to further undergo R.I. for one month.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the finding of conviction of the appellant but confined his arguments only on the point of sentence. So there is no need to consider the facts of the case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that out of 13 persons who were tried, these three appellants have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid, the appellants are first offender and there is no criminal record against them. The incident is of the year 1993. Therefore, their case may be considered 2sympathetically. He submits that alleged offence under Section 323 IPC is punishable with fine alone also.

4. On the contrary, learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment delivered by the trial Court and contended that no interference is called for in this appeal.

5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and submissions made by the parties, the interest of justice would be served if the amount of fine is enhanced in lieu of sentence.  Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellants by the trial Court is hereby maintained.

However, instead of jail sentence, I impose extra fine amount of Rs.1,000/-(Rs. One Thousand Only) on each appellant. The said amount be deposited in the trial 3Court within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which the appellants shall undergo R.I. for one month. The appellants are on bail, in case the fine amount is deposited by them, their bail bonds shall stand discharged.




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //