Halkeram vs State of M.P.

Tarun Kumar Kaushal, J.—The petitioner has preferred present revision petition against judgment dated 18.8.2005, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sehora in Criminal Appeal No. unregistered/2005, affirming conviction of petitioner u/s 325 of IPC. Appellate Court has modified and reduced the period of jail sentence from six months to three months RI only. Vide judgment dated 21.7.2005, JMFC Sihora convicted the petitioner u/s 325 of IPC and sentenced to six months RI with fine of Rs. 500/-. According to prosecution, on 19.11996 at about 11.45 a.m. in village Khabra, grand mother of Amrit Lal (P.W. 1) visited the field of the petitioner. Having annoyed of such visit, petitioner came to the house of P.W./1 and abused him. The petitioner assaulted stick blows on the person of P.W./1. P.W./1 sustained a fracture of right hand radius bone lower 1/3 part in this incident. After completion of the investigation, Police Majholi submitted charge sheet before the JMFC. Trial Court framed the charges u/s 294 and 325 of IPC against petitioner. The petitioner abjured guilt.

To substantiate the case of the prosecution, statements of Amritlal (P.W./1), V.P. Pandey (P.W./2), Divakar Rai (P.W./3), Sakun Bai (P.W./4), Arjun Puri Goswami (PW-5), Anari Lal Mehra (PW 6), A.M. Agrawal (PW 7) and Ugrasen Dubey, Head Constable (P.W. 8) were recorded.

After appreciation of the evidence trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner as above. In appeal sentence was reduced from six months RI to three months RI.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of investigation, trial and appeal petitioner has undergone custody of eleven days. Petitioner now has attained the age of about seventy years. From the date of the offence no other incident has been reported against petitioner so far. Hence, without much assailing the findings on merits learned counsel for petitioner prays for a lenient view to be taken on the point of sentence only.

On perusing the statements of P.W. 1 and medical evidence and further in view of the nature and manner of the incident, it appears to be a fit case where lenient view can be taken for awarding the sentence in the interest of justice. In addition to undergone period of eleven days, a sentence of fine of Rs. 2,000/- would be just, proper and sufficient and would meet the ends of justice. Fine sentence is enhanced accordingly. In default of payment of fine, petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment of one month. The petitioner shall remain present in Trial Court on or before 6th of August, 2013 for depositing fine amount or to undergo jail sentence, as the case may be. On deposit of fine amount Trial Court shall arrange to pay compensation of Rs. 1,500/- to the victim P.W. 1. Revision is allowed in part, as indicated above.