1 Criminal Revision No.1549/2010 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.1549/2010 Dilip Nagmare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Rahul Tripathi, Advocate for the applicant. Shri G.S. Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R (Passed on 22nd day of June, 2011) The applicant was convicted by J.M.F.C. Balaghat (Shri D.R. Kavde) in Criminal Case No.2288/2008 vide order dated 8.4.2010 for the offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced for one year R.I. with fine of Rs.200/-. The applicant was to undergo for further period of three months R.I. in default of payment of fine but he has deposited the fine amount. In Criminal Appeal No.101/2010, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction of the applicant but reduced his sentence to four months R.I. with fine of Rs.200/-. Being aggrieved from the judgment of both the Courts below, the applicant has preferred this revision. 2 Criminal Revision No.1549/2010 2. Prosecution story in short is that the complainant Usha Bai was wife of the applicant. On 15.11.2008 the applicant went his house at about 8 P.M., he was in a drunk condition. The applicant started quarreling with his wife with some allegations regarding her character. He assaulted his wife by kicks and fists and he rubbed the foot of the complainant Usha Bai by his leg. The complainant lodged the FIR on 16.11.2008. The complainant was sent to the hospital for her medical examination. A fracture was found in the foot of the complainant Usha Bai. After due investigation, challan was filed before the trial Court. 3. The applicant abjured his guilt but he did not take any specific plea. No defence evidence has been adduced. 4. After considering the prosecution evidence, learned J.M.F.C. Balaghat has convicted and sentenced the applicant as mentioned above, whereas the Sessions Judge, Balaghat decided his appeal as mentioned above. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties at length. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no weapon has been used by the applicant in assaulting his wife. He was not aware that due to rubbing of his leg on the foot of the complainant, she would sustain a fracture. The applicant remained in the custody for 40 days. He is only 3 Criminal Revision No.1549/2010 bread-earner in his family. He is suffering the trial, appeal and this revision since last three years. Under these circumstances, he prays that the jail sentence as imposed upon the applicant may be reduced to the period, which he has already undergone in the custody, whereas fine amount may be increased. 7. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, where the complainant was wife of the applicant, her testimony cannot be disbelieved. There was no reason for which the wife of the applicant would tell against her husband, therefore, the conviction directed by the Courts below should be maintained. 8. As far as the sentence is concerned, offence under Section 325 of IPC is a grave offence, however it is clear that the applicant has not used any weapons in causing grave injury to his wife and he was also drunk at the time of incident. Since he has undergone in the custody for 40 days and he was suffering the trial, appeal and this revision since three years, under these circumstances it would be proper that he may not be sent back to jail, whereas fine amount may be increased. 9. Under these circumstances, the criminal revision filed by the applicant may partly be accepted. Consequently, it is partly accepted. The conviction directed for the offence 4 Criminal Revision No.1549/2010 under Section 325 of IPC is hereby affirmed, but the sentence is reduced to the period, which he has already undergone in the custody, whereas the fine amount is enhanced to Rs.2500/- (Rupees Two thousand five hundred only). The applicant shall deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court within two months from today. In default of payment of fine amount, he shall undergo for three months R.I. The complainant Usha Bai shall receive a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation out of fine amount. 10. At present, the presence of the applicant is not more required, therefore, it is directed that the bail bonds of the applicant shall stand discharged. (N.K. GUPTA) JUDGE 22.06.2011 pnkj