IN TEE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR CRIMINAL APybAL N0.Q:U\/1997. (APPEAL UNDER swarm»: 374(2) OF CMMINAL PROCEDURE coma 1973) :gEEe 1 1am: :V _ ingie encih (CnmmaD I /. santOsh s/o Bagas Mehar. aged about ‘4 years Resident of /» sundrawan 2 Police Station-Palari. District. Raipuxj '(M.P.). .vs- Sta3ce of Madhya Pradesh, through Police Station—Palari, District. Raipur (M.P.). Re sgiiiegt : nan-as m. A,“ , b. by m G} C’Nu a mwm-w' AJvoCEE n, m... k Rho AR : ‘ Conviction under Section 3244Indian Penal ;¢oc}e. Sentense Rlgerous imprisonment for , 3 years and fine of Rs 1000/-. In default of payment of fine. furthe R I. for 6 mont hs o ‘34 W§l7 APPLICATmN UNDER SEcg‘_x_o;\Iw3j4(2) OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE S E- 2 / r HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI8GARH AT BILASPUR 8B : HON’BLE MR. JUSTXCE PRITINKER DIWAKEB CRA.N0. 624-! 1997 Santash Vel‘SHS State of MP. APPELLANT RESPONDENT up Shri Sunil Sahu, counsel for the appellant; Shri Neeraj Mehta, P.L. for the Stata. APPEAL § Ulé 37412] OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE JUDGMENT «16.04.2011) Tbs present appeal an'ses out of the judgment 8s order datecl 21 1 1§97 gassed bv the Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, D1stnot Ralpur m Qesswn Tnal No 169/90 convicting the accused/appellant for the mience pumshable under Sectmn 324 of the Indlan Penal Code and sentencmg h1m to undergo ngorous unpnsonment for three yeals and fine of Rs 1000 m default of payment of mac to further undergo ngorous unpnsonment for s1x months. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 24.11.89 at about 9.30 a.m. FIR EXP/5 was lodged by victim Khuman Singh, (P.W.-7) alleging that on the said day at about 7.00 a.m. accused/appellant assaulted him on his head by axe as a lesult of which he suifered mjunes Based on tlns FIR od‘ence under Secnon 307 IPC was regtstered agamst the accused/ appellant After mvesnganon, challan was med on 14.~12.200ggnder Secuons 307 an 324 IPC 3. So as to pmve the guilt of the accused/appellant, the prosecution has examined 8 Witnesses One defence witness has also been examined Statement of the accused] appellant was a1so recorded under Section 313 of the Cr F C in which he denied the ‘ V charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and falsc implication in the case. 4. After hearing counsel for tho yarn'cs, the trial Court has acquitted the accused/appellant of the charge under Section 307 of the ludian Penal Code but has convicted them under Section 324 IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above. Hence this appeal. 5. Contention of Shri Sahu, counsel for the appellant is that he is not pressing this appeal so far as it relates to conviction part of the judgment impugned and would confine his argument to the sentence pan of the same only. He submits that at the time of commission of the offence the appellant was a young man aged about 24 yeaxs, the appellant has already remained in Jail for about t‘mee months, the incident had taken place about 21 years back, no useful purpose would be sewed in again sending him back to jail. He however submits that the appellant is willing to compensate the victim by paying him adequate compensation. 6. On the other hand, State counsel submits that four injuries were sudered by the complainant/victim ineluding three injuries on his head and therefore no leniency be shown to the appellant. u e 7. Considering the has and circumstances of the case, the conviction paxt of the impugned judgment is maintained However looking to the fact that at the time of commission of the odence the appellant was a young man aged about 24 years, the incident had taken place about 21 years back the appellant has alreadv remained in Jail for about three months, this Court is of the View that 1t would be m the mteiest of Justice 1f the Jail sentence imposed on the accused] appellant 1Ssrneduced to the period already undergone by him subject to enhancement of sentence of hne. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. Jail sentence hnposed. p i ‘ on the accused/appellant is hereby reduced to the period already ‘ undergone by him. However, in the interest of justice, the tine of Rs. 2,000 imposed by the trial Court is enhanced to Rs. 12.000. Out of 8. F) (237 this amount of Rs. 12,000, Rs. 10,000 be given to the victim as compensah'on under Sech'on 357 of the Cr.P.C. Appellant is dirccmd to deposit the additional amount. of Rs. 10,000 'bcfom the Court below within a period of six months mm the date of receipt of copy of this order and if this amount is not deposited within the said period the appellant shall undergo rigorous impn‘sonment of six montha. Prmnker D‘waker Judge /// sdF ’7