AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 495 words@JUDGEMENT- JUDGEMENT
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J
Considering the conviction and short jail sentence, the appeal is heard finally.
The present appeal is filed under section 374 of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentenced dated 05.03.2024 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sonkatch, District Dewas in ST No.28/2021 whereby, convicting the appellant under section 323 (two counts) of IPC and sentenced to undergo 6 months RI with fine of Rs.500/- for causing simple injury to Radheshyam and Abhishek.
From the facts of the case, it is established that a counter case was also registered against the complainant side in case no.20/2021 for commission of offence under section 302 of IPC and other offences for causing death of one Narayan. In the present case, initially the appellant was prosecuted for offence under section 294, 323/34, 427, 506 of IPC. The trial court after evaluation of the evidence of PW No.1 Radheshyam, PW No.2 Shivam, PW No.3 Abhishek and PW No.6 Krishnabai held that the prosecution has failed to prove the offence under section 294, 427, 323/34, 506 of IPC. However, the prosecution proved its case beyond any about that the accused person had caused simple injury to Radheshyam and Abhishek and convicted the appellant as mentioned hereinabove.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the incident had taken place in the year 2021 and the appellant was on bail during trial and after conviction also his jail sentence has been suspended. He further submits that he is not challenging the order on merit but confines his submission on the question of sentence and submits that for the offence under section 323 of IPC, the jail sentence is not mandatory and therefore, the fine amount may be enhanced and the enhanced fine amount may be directed to be paid to the injured persons by way of compensation.
Learned counsel for the respondent/state supported the impugned order.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the appellant has been convicted only under section 323 of IPC and the jail sentence is not mandatory under section 323 of IPC therefore, while maintaining the conviction under section 323 (two counts) of IPC, instead of jail sentence, fine amount of Rs.500/- is enhanced to Rs.5500/- and the enhanced fine amount shall be deposited within the period of three months from today and if the enhanced fine amount is deposited within the said period, the bail bonds of the appellant shall be discharged. The suspension of sentence of the appellant shall continue for three months from today, which shall be discharged after deposit of enhanced fine amount.
Out of the enhanced fine amount, Rs.5000/- shall be paid to the injured Radheshyam and Abhishek by the trial court. If the enhanced fine amount is not deposited within the said period, the appellant shall undergo remaining jail sentence.
With the aforesaid, the present appeal stands partly allowed and disposed off.