CF0000061 21 8 ”nu-wM/pm w , / *ga 1am ”zaagi‘g? WADHYA PRADEsH‘ ‘m'r J-ABALPUR‘ v V' < .; ‘ ~\ , Cr.Appeal Non 39" Of 1996> V ‘ - I __ x” C "ii Appellant , z Deonishr 3/0 Pgllug‘Kirkitta aged :V M .r.,. ‘THE HIGH COURT OF FL 11‘ 1 V v r ' ' about _ 24 yéa/r‘si/. resideV-lt /’ of , g} H Village Groto/Llne‘Kunkur’i: PMS», __ ‘ ‘ _1’<unk’uri @is'trict(1§aigarh ’fMP} . Ver SL1 S u t‘ ’ ‘Rewgndgnt : Agate of Maiihya Pradesh, through Diétfict Magistrate} ‘ k - ‘ Raigarh (MP), u ; ,gRmmAL APPEAL 'UNbER $13cwION 374 (‘g) 03 \cr‘.15‘.c‘. V, ‘ » a ‘3. HIGH COURT QF €HtlA'I'TISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Prltlnker Diwaker) criminal Appegl Noq 3Q ¢f 1Q9$ ‘ '° ARPEIPLANI DeOnISh VERSUS. RESP¢ND§NT State of Madhya Pradesh Shri Aditya Tiwari, counsel for the appeilant, Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L. for the State; V , CRIMINAL APPEAL. UNDER $§¢TION 374 (2) ¢F THE ‘ COD$ OF CRIMINAL PROCEDUag & e J U D G M E N T ‘ (25.04.2011) ‘ ‘ ? » i The' present appeal arises out of the judgment and'prder dated 05.12.1995 passed by Additiona! Sessions Judge, Jaehpurnagar in Sessions Tria! No. 116 of 1995 convicting the acéused/appeuant under Section 325 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay finie of Rs. 500, in defauit of payment of fine to further unhergo simple imprisonment for two months. 2:; Brief facts of the case are that on 04.11.1994, FIR Ex. P—1 was lodged by the compiainant Neeikusum (PW—1) allEging in it that on that day when she wasaenjoying Diwaii festival along With other persons of the Vicmity, the accusedlappellant and the two acquitted accused Basant Panna and Alexezender reached there armed with various weapons They caught hoid her brother Lalit Kumar (PW—2) and the appellant Deomsh gave a knife blow on his rib and thereafter other accused persons aiso assaulted him. It is alleged that when the complainant intervened in the matter, shie too was assaulted by the accused persons. Based on this FIIR, Offence under Sections 307/34I323 of IPC was registered ii against the present appellant and other two acquitted accused ~ V -ir persons. After completion of' investigation Chat/an was f‘iied on 07.12.1994 against them for the affence under Sections 307;, 325, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC. 3. l So as to hold the accused persons guilty, prosecution has examined 12 witnesses in support of its case. statements of tPe accused persons were also recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the cha ges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and i‘a’l’se implication in the case. 4. l After hearing the parties the trial Court has acquitted the coiaccused‘casant Panna and Alexezender of all the charges levelled against them whereas the appellant though has: been acquitted of the offence under Section 307, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC but convicted and sentenced for thei offence under Section 325 of IPC, hence, the present appeaL 5. { Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material ava‘ilable on record including the judgment impugned. : l 6. l Counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing» thisl appeal as far as it relates to convictiop part of the impjugned judgment and would confine his afgument to the * sentence part thereof only. According to him, the incident had taken place about 16 years back, at the relevant time‘the appjellant was a young man of 24 years, that the appeilant. hasilalready remained in jail for 2 months and '8 days, no seful purpose would heserved in sending him back to jail andi it would be in the interest" of justice. if'the sentence impiosed on him is reduced to the period already undergone, . y ihim. To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. _ u b :3)” & 7 { Accordingiy, the appeal i$ §artiy aHowad Conviction part he Impugned Judgment is mamtamed However, iooklng to th facts and Circumstances of the case, in particular, the inc dent had taken place about 16 years back, at the relevant ti e the appeiiant was a young man of 24 years and now he m st be a middle aged person, that the appellant has already re ained in jail for 2 months and 8 days, the Jail sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by’hlm However, in lieu thereof the appellant is directed to pay a fne of Rs 3 000 which would be payable to the Victim Lalit Kumar (PW 2) within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the fine amount as directed is not deposited in the trial Court within the g l stipulated period,ithe appellantshail under go imprisonment for? a period of'one month, Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge 8, ~ Appeal thus partly succeeds. . ' " j