NH||ll||||||l|H|||H||||||| CF0000061 886 IN I'HE HIGH CQUR’I‘ OF JUDICATURE AT JAEALPU W HgF‘ W‘ b “ APEAL UNDER 5mm»: 374 ”0F Cr. p. c g Awmmr é Criminal Appeal éX§ »of 1997 M k ) AaM DQbhai, s/a siéhéi fKamar ged 35 years Vi agé Libra, Police station Tnar Distrim: Raigarh. {/47 jaa/ VERSUS { i i {r RE$aormEb1T State of M.P. through S‘D. Tamnar, Di‘s. Raigarh )r W i ’ Bi AED B mama DATED 12~03-1997 PAsSED BY LEARN n GRE ED en in“ lgyhz 91D UPPE f 3§am&§imZ/Jw mm. m,“ “w M gcrauvmwmn ig . SENTENCE nd o 3 monthsiyRJ. a £ine .f Rs. 500/- in the deiault of fine 15 d&ys additional R.I/ f Under Section 324 I pgc W R a my / a am §t . M 1 R , i] a HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Singie Eench : Hon‘bie Mr, Jus‘Hce Wifinker Diwaker Criminal Appeai No.616 of 1997 APPELLAN? ‘ Dobhai, s/o Sidhar‘ Kumar- Versus RESPONDENT 5mm of Madhya Pmdesh ‘ Mr. 'Sunil Sahu, counsei for fine appeimm‘. § Mrs. 5mii‘a éhai, PL for The STafe/respanden‘r. gRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 3?4 (2) OF THE CODE OF 5 V ‘ cRmmAL PRGCEDURE ‘JUDsMENT (05.04201 1) This appeal is direcfed against the impugned judgmem and arder‘ dafed 1233,1997 passed by 2'” Addifiond Sessions Judge Raigar'h in Sessions Triai No. 266/1995 convic‘ring ’rhe accused/appgliant for the offence punishcbie under Seci’ion 324 of The; Indian Penai Code and sentencing mm To under-go rigorous impi'isonmen’r for Three manihs and pay finegof Rsg500/-, in default of paymen‘r of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonmeni for 15 days‘, t gee 2. Fac’rs of The case in brief are tho? on 12.811995 F,I.R. (EXP—1) was lodged by Vijoy (i’W-l) oiieging in if that on ”the some day of obouf 5.30 pm. 'ihere was some dispute be'iween him and the appeiiani, and when one Jayrom (PW-2) intervened, he was ossauh‘ed by the accused/appellant wiih the help of knife. Based on this report, offence under Section 307 of The Indian Penal Code was regisiered againsi‘ ihe accused/appellant After completion of investigation dial/an was filed on 49,1995 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. @ 3. In order to edablish The guih‘ of The accusedlcppetiam, The prosecu‘hon has examined as many as 9 w;‘rnesses. S’rwemem of fhe accused/appellant was also recorded under Sectian 313 of The Cr,P.C. in which he denied ’rhe charges Seveiled qgmnsf him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case 4. After hearing the parties the trlai Caur* has acqum'ed ‘rhe acchsed/appellan’r of the offence under Sectxon 307 of the Indian Penhl Code but has conwcted and sentenced him for The offence as menfio‘ned above. ‘ a 5, Heard counsel for The parties and ‘ perused 1he ma‘reriai 6. Counsei for the appetlant submits that he is not pressing this it relates to the conviction part of the Impuoned gudgment and would have a limited prayer With respect to the sentence part thereof only He submits that incident had taken place appeal as far as all of a sudden submits that as and there was no pre—planning for the same. He the appellant has already gemamed in Jail for about 2.3 days, maident took place about 15 years back, no useful purpose in sending him to jail and it would be in the interest of justice if sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. 7. In View of above, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained. Appellant is reported to have remained in'jail for about 23 days, incident took place about 15 years back and, therefore, he is sentenced to the period already undergone, by him. l 8. Appeal thus partly succeeds. / Dmaw‘ ge 9mm“ available on record inciuding the judgment impugned. A ' would be served d