Maqbool vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Hon''ble Justice Shri N.K. Gupta

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 18.9.1996 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Satna in Special Case No.122/1995 whereby the appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 325 and 323 of I.P.C and sentenced for 6 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.250/-and three months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.250/-. On default of payment of fine on each count an additional sentence for two months rigorous imprisonment was directed. The prosecution''s story in short is that on 27.10.1995 Munni Bai (PW3) was taking some water from a public tap in her Village Saiding (Police Station Kolgawan, District Satna) then the appellant came with a stick and he quarreled with the appellant with the pretext as to why she took the water from his personal tap. The appellant assaulted the victim by a stick causing her some injuries on her nose, near the left eye and other parts of the body. In the meantime, Maya daughter of the complainant went to save her mother then the appellant also assaulted her, causing her some injuries on both the hands and left eye. Thereafter, the complainant Munni Bai was taken to the Police Station, Kolgawan where she lodged an FIR Ex. P/3. All the injured persons were sent to the District Hospital, Satna. Dr. D.K. Tiwari (PW1) examined Munni Bai and Maya and gave his report Ex. P/1 and P/2. He found three injuries to the complainant Munni Bai. One lacerated wound was found on her head, second was a lacerated wound on her nose and a blunt wound on the left forearm. For the third injury of the complainant she was referred for X-Ray examination whereas, the victim Maya sustained two injuries. One on right thumb and second on left eyebrow which were simple in nature. Dr. V.G Hinduja (PW7) on X-Ray examination found that the victim Munni Bai sustained a fracture on her nasal bone as well as left ulna bone. A report Ex. P/9 was given in this context. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed before the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter it will be referred as the "Special Act").

The appellant abjured his guilt. He did not take any specific plea in the case but, he has stated that some quarrel took place between the complainant and one Sharif, cousin of the appellant and therefore, due to that enmity the appellant was falsely implicated in the matter. In defence Sanjay (DW1) and Anwar Ali (DW2) were examined,.

After considering the evidence adduced by the parties the learned Special Judge acquitted the appellant from the charges of offence punishable u/s 3(1)(v) of the Special Act but, convicted him for offence punishable u/s 325, 323 of I.P.C and sentenced as mentioned above.

I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties,.

The Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an old person of approximately 62 years of age who is suffering from paralysis. He was brought before the Court on 5.9.2012 with a great difficulty and therefore, it would be impossible for him to undergo the entire jail sentence. He was the first offender. He faced the trial and appeal for last 17 years. Under such circumstances, he may not be sent to the jail again. However, some fine may be imposed upon the appellant.

On the other hand the learned Panel Lawyer submits that the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court appears to be correct and no interference is required in the present appeal.

After considering the submissions made by Learned Counsel for the parties it appears that the appellant does not challenge the conviction directed against him and therefore, there is no need of any discussion on the merits of the case. So far as the sentence is concerned it is clear that the appellant is suffering from paralysis. He is an old man who, was brought before the Court with a great difficulty. It is impossible for him to undergo any jail sentence. He remained in the jail for two days during the trial. Also he faced the trial and appeal for last 17 years and he was the first offender under such circumstances, his jail sentence may be reduced to the period which he has already undergone in the custody by enhancing fine amount.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion the appeal filed by the appellant is hereby partly allowed. The conviction directed by the trial Court for offences punishable u/s 325 and 323 of I.P.C is hereby maintained but the sentence is reduced to the period which he has already undergone in the custody whereas, fine imposed for the offence punishable u/s 325 of I.P.C is enhanced from a sum of Rs.250/-to a sum of Rs.4500/-and for offence punishabe u/s 323 of I.P.C fine amount is enhanced from a sum of Rs.250/-to a sum of Rs.500/-The appellant is directed to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court within two months from today failing which he shall undergo for six months rigorous imprisonment for the fine of offence punishable u/s 325 of I.P.C and one months rigorous imprisonment for the fine of offence punishable u/s 323 of I.P.C. If fine is deposited then each of the victims Munni Bai and Maya shall get a sum of Rs. 4000/-and Rs.500/-respectively as a compensation out of that fine.

The presence of the appellant is no more required in the case and therefore, it is directed that his bail bonds shall stand discharged. Copy of the judgment may be sent to the trial Court along with its record as early as possible for information and compliance.