Wmlluwimmmm T 57752 §§ha3§ gawk {‘Crimina” IN THE HIQI COURT OF MAIHY& PWESH AKT‘JABkL’PUR CRIMINAL APPEAL. No% ?3 /199$‘ z ; \Ql. Nixmal 3ingh son o£ Balbhaaa Singh‘. ‘ aged 23 years, ‘ f é , a Bath resicients of villate Tantani, Pclice Station Nadagarh, Distrit Bur (M‘PO) AWELMN Ts g (IN JM k 2. Ajab 31ngki, son oE Balbhadra‘ 3ingh ' gea 31 years, c g ‘ - : VERSUS : - REEsPONDENT : state of Maaha'lpzadesh y. RIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SmTION 374(2) OF THE CODE CRIMINAL- PROCEDUag; : { l ' L) C OF HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminal Appeal No. 73 of 1995. APPELLANTS Nirmal Singh and another. VERSUS RESPONDENT State of Madhya Pradesh. Shri Alok Nigam counsel for appellants. Shri Vivek Sharma PL for respondent/State. CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 (2) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. JUDGMENT (22.02.2010) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28.12.1994 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, Camp at Bametara in Sessions Trial No. 50/1994 convicting the accused/appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 450, 307 and 307/34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fiVe years, ten years‘and ten years on each count. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 11.10.1993 on the basis of Dehati Nailisi Ex. P-11 made by one Ram Gopal Pandey (PW-6), .FIR was registered on that day itself. It is alleged that on 10.10.1993 at about 8 p.m. accused/appellant No.2 Ajab Singh had assaulted Badan Bai (PW-4) with an axe (Tabbal) as a result of which she had sustained 12 injuries on her body'including four fractures. Allegation against appellant No.1 Nirmal Singh is that he was simply present on the spot. 3. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, prosecution has examined 10 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges I levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false ‘ implication in the case. This ap‘art, three witnesses namely Garju a . \ ‘ -2, Ram (DW—1), Bantu (DW-2) and Chandrika Bai (DW-3) were examined by the defence in support of its case. 4. After hearing the parties the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused / appellants for the offence as mentioned above. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the judgment impugned. Counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing this appeal as far as it relates to conviction part of the impugned judgment and would cormne his argument to the sentence part thereof only. According to him, as the appellant No.1 Nirmal Singh has already remained in jail for one year, three months and six days whereas appellant No.2 Ajab Singh remained therein for five years, eleven months and twenty four days, that the incident had taken place between the relatives and by now their relations have attained normalcy and that the incident is said to have taken place in the year 1993, no useful purpose would be served in sending them to jail and it would be in the interest of justice if the sentences imposed on them is reduced to the period already undergone by him. To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. 6. 7. In view of above, the‘appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained. Appellants are reported to have remained in jail for a period of one year, three months and six days and five years, eleven months and twenty four days respectively, therefore, their sentences are reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, in lieu thereof,’the appellants are directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,200 each. Meaning thereby, the total amount to be deposited by both of them would be Rs. 2,400 out of which Rs. 2000 shall be given to the victim. If this amount of Rs. 2,000 is not paid to the victim within a period of four months from today,‘the sentence awarded by the Courtbelow shall stand restored. 8. Appeal thus partly succeeds. H ll Sd/— H‘ Pritinker Diwaker Judge .