Dinesh vs State of M.P.

U.C. Maheshwari, J.—This revision is directed on behalf of the applicant/accused u/s 397/401 of the Cr.P.C, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.8.2011 passed by the Addl.Sessions Judge, Amarwada,Chhindwara in Cr.A.No.251/10 whereby dismissing his appeal, the judgment dated 16.7.2010 passed by the JMFC, Chhindwara in Cr.C.No.518/08 convicting and sentencing him for the offence u/s 325 of the IPC with a direction to undergo RI one year with fine of Rs. 500/-in default of depositing the fine amount further RI one month, has been affirmed.

The short facts of the case necessary to adjudicate this revision are that on 5.10.08 one Bisanwati lodged the FIR at Police station Chourai contending that some days before she harvested the corn crops from the field of the applicant at his instance. In that connection, Rs. 800/-was outstanding against the applicant and in the morning between 8-9 O'' clock when she went to his residence to demand such sum then instead to pay the sum, she was subject to abuse and also beaten by means of stick by the applicant, resultantly she sustained the injuries at below knee of the left leg, both hands, both thighs, palm of the right hand and also at back side. After lodging the report she was sent to the hospital where her medical report was prepared. On carrying out the x-ray in the left leg, the fracture of Tibiafebula bone was revealed. On completion of the investigation, the applicant was charge sheeted for the offence u/s 294, 323, 506 and 325 of the IPC. On framing the charge by the trial court, he abjured the guilt, on which the trial was held. On appreciation of the evidence, he was convicted and sentenced as stated above. On filing the appeal, the same was dismissed, on which, the applicant has come to this court with this revision.

Shri Rahul Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant without challenging the findings of the courts below holding conviction against the applicant u/s 325 of the IPC, has made his limited submission that considering the age 22 years of the applicant on the date of the offence, also keeping in view his future welfare of the educational career by reducing his jail sentence, he be punished with the jail sentence for which he has already undergone from 23.8.2011 the date of the appellate court judgment till today, by enhancing the amount of fine under the discretion of the court.

On the other hand, responding the aforesaid argument Smt Nirmala Nayak, GA by justifying the impugned judgments submits that the approach of the courts below holding conviction and sentence against the applicant u/s 325 of the IPC, is based on proper appreciation of the evidence and it does not require any interference at this stage. In continuation she also said that in any case, in the available circumstances, the applicant does not deserve either for extending the acquittal or for reduction of the jail sentence awarded by the courts below and prayed for dismissal of this revision.

Having heard the counsel, keeping in view their arguments, I have carefully gone through the record of the courts below along with the impugned judgments. Although, the case has not been argued on merits by the applicant''s counsel but in order to do justice with the applicant, on examining the case, I have not found any perversity in appreciation of the evidence by the courts below in holding guilty to the applicant for the alleged offence. In such premises, the approach of the courts below holding conviction against the applicant u/s 325 of the IPC does not require any interference at this stage. So till this extent, the impugned judgments are here by affirmed.

Coming to consider the prayer of the applicant''s counsel for reduction of the jail sentence is concerned, I have found some substance in it. Keeping in view the age of the applicant 22 years on the date of the incident and he being first offender, did not have any criminal past, instead to keep him continue for one year in jail, I deem fit to reduce his jail sentence by enhancing some substantial amount of fine with direction to pay the same to the complainant Bisanwati to sub serve the justice with her also.

Therefore, by affirming the conviction of the applicant awarded by the trial court, this revision is allowed in part and the sentence of the applicant u/s 325 IPC is reduced from one year to the period for which he has already undergone since 23.8.2011 till today by enhancing the amount of fine from Rs. 500/-to Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of enhanced fine amount, he shall suffer further RI three month. On depositing the aforesaid fine amount, the applicant shall be set at liberty and such deposited enhanced amount of fine Rs. 9500/-shall be given to the aforesaid complainant/victim Bisanwati by calling her in the trial court through summons.

The revision is allowed in part as indicated above.