Lalu & Anr vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "The Code") has been preferred by the applicants against the judgment dated 12/01/2019 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, in Cri. Appeal No.105/2018, wherein the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal by affirming the conviction and sentence passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhar vide judgment dated 13/10/2017 in Criminal Case No.1395/2012 whereby each of the applicants have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC, 1860 and sentenced to undergo 1 year R.I and fine of Rs.1000/- with usual default stipulation.

Prosecution story in nutshell are that on 04/12/2011 at about 8.30 hours, when complainant Akash Chouhan was sitting outside his house at that time, applicants armed with iron rod and 'faliya' came there by hurling abuses on complainant, on account of previous dispute regarding land. When complainant stopped them, applicant Ravi started assaulting him with iron rod due to which he sustained injuries in three fingers of his right hand. Complainant's father Kamal, Jagdish and Lakhan who were present on the spot came and rescued the complainant. Thereafter, complainant lodged complaint at Police Station-Kotwali, Dhar. On the basis of which, 'Adham Check' bearing No. 1556/2011 for offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 of IPC, 1860 was registered against the applicants. Injured Akash Chouhan was sent for medical examination and in the X-ray examination fractures were deducted in base of proximal phalanx of index and middle finger of his right hand, therefore police registered FIR bearing crime no. 890/2011 for offence punishable under Section 294, 323, 325, 34, 506 of IPC against the applicants. Head Constable - Yashwant Singh visited the spot, prepared the spot map and recovered one bamboo stick and iron rod from the place of occurrence. Statement of witnesses were recorded and the applicants were arrested. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed against the accused persons for the said offence.

Trial Court, while passing the judgment, convicted the applicants for offence punishable under Sections 325 of IPC, 1860 and sentenced each of them to undergo 1 year R.I and fine of Rs.1,000/-, with usual default stipulation. An appeal was filed against the said conviction and sentence, which was dismissed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar vide judgment dated 12/01/2019. This judgment is under challenge in the present revision petition.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the independent witnesses of the case did not support the prosecution story and the statement of the witnesses are self contradictory, which was overlooked by the Courts below and they have committed error in not properly appreciating the evidence, thus, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside in the present revision. Lastly it is submitted that since the applicants are first offender, they have faced the prosecution before the Court concerned for more than 8 years and have already served almost 3 months of their jail sentence, therefore, the same may be reduced to the period of undergone.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that after due appreciation of the evidence learned Courts below have found the applicants guilty of the offence hence no interference is called for in the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below.

I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and perused the material on record.

From the perusal of the record, it reveals that commission of alleged offence by the applicant is found proved on the basis of statement of complainant Akash Chouhan (P.W.1), Kamal (P.W.2), which is also corroborated by the F.I.R (Ex.P/6) and the statement of Dr. Charu Gupta (P.W.5) and Dr. Sanjay Joshi (P.W.6). The scope of appreciation of evidence in the revision is very limited, therefore, this Court is of the view that the Courts below have rightly believed the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and convicted the applicants for the aforesaid offence.

In view of the aforesaid and on the basis of the material available on the record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Courts below have not committed any illegality in convicting the applicants for offence punishable under Sections 325 of IPC, 1860.

So far as the period of sentence is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that looking to the fact that the applicants are not having any criminal antecedents, they have faced the prosecution for more than 8 years and have already served more than 3 months of their jail sentence and they assure that in future they will not involve in any offence, therefore, this Court is of the view that the jail sentence awarded to the applicants deserves to be and is hereby reduced to the period of four months subject to depositing additional fine of Rs.4,000/- by each of the applicant. In default of payment of enhanced fine amount, the applicants shall suffer one month R.I. Out of the fine amount of a sum of Rs.5000/-shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.

The Registry of this Court is directed to arrange for issuance of supersession warrant against applicants Lallu @ Lalu and Ravi. A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court along with record for information and compliance.

Resultantly, the present criminal revision stands partly allowed.

Certified copy as per Rules.