1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Cr.A. No. 476/1997 Babloo alias Jaikumar Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh ___________________________________________________________ For the appellant: Shri Ramesh Tamrakar, Advocate For the respondent/: Shri N.K. Agrawal, Government State Advocate ___________________________________________________________ Present: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.C. Sinho ___________________________________________________________ J U D G M E N T (05.05.2011) 1. The appellant has filed this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.02.1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sohagpur to the Court of Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in S.T. No.240/1993, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 326 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 3 months. 2. According to prosecution case on 03.02.1992 at about 4:00 p.m. complainant Jugal Jishore was going to his village through Pachmarhi road along with Nanakram. On the way appellant Jaikumar who was student of 11th class met them. Appellant used filthy language to Nanakram, on this complainant told appellant not to do so but he caught hold the collar of complainant and grappled with each other. Appellant inflicted knife blow in the abdomen of complainant. Injured was carried to hospital. Doctor sent the written information to the police and on reaching the 2 police Dehati Nalisi was written. The injured was referred to Medical College, Jabalpur. On the basis of Dehati Nalisi Crime No.36/92 was registered at police station Pirpaiya. After completing the usual investigation the charge sheet was filed in the competent court. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that he is not challenging the finding of conviction recorded by the trial Court whereby the appellant has been found guilty under Section 326 of I.P.C. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant and complainant were friends and while they were coming from School due to some trifling dispute aforesaid incident took place. The appellant was hardly of 19 years of age at the time of incident. The only prayer is that the appellant is not habitual offender and no previous criminal conduct of the appellant has been proved by the prosecution. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant remained in jail for about 55 days, therefore, he be released on the period already undergone. 4. The learned Government Advocate supported the impugned judgment passed by the court below. 5. Learned trial Court has rightly relied on the statement of PW-5 Jugal Kishore, PW-6 Gopal and PW-4 Mohanlal. Just after the incident named F.I.R. Ex.P-6 was recorded by Police Station Pipariya and injured was referred to Dr. PW-10 A.K. Verma and found the injury as mentioned in medical report Ex.P-10. 3 6. As before this court the finding of conviction of the appellant under Section 326 of I.P.C. is not challenged, hence, the aforesaid finding is hereby affirmed. 7. Shri Tamrakar, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was of 19 years of age at the time of incident and he was studying in 11th Class at that time, therefore, in view of provisions of Probation of Offenders' Act, 1958 he could not have been sent to jail. 8. With regard to sentence is concerned, admittedly, the appellant was in custody for 55 days. He is a first offender. No previous criminal conduct of the appellant has been proved by the prosecution. No fruitful purpose will be served by sending him in jail after lapse of such a long time. In these circumstances, the jail sentence awarded by the court below can be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 9. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed in part. The conviction of the appellant under Section 326 of I.P.C. is hereby affirmed, however, the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.2500/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall suffer further imprisonment for 2 months. 10. The total realised fine amount of Rs.2500/- be paid to complainant Jugal Kishore, S/o Babulal, R/o Gram Langhi, Police Station Pipariya by way of compensation under Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. 11. With the aforesaid directions and modifications in the sentence, this criminal appeal stands disposed of. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for information and compliance. (S.C. Sinho) Judge psm