Meshar Tekam And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Avanindra Kumar Singh, J

Heard on admission.

This criminal revision is admitted for hearing.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are not pressing IA No.26054/2025, an application for suspension of sentence of petitioners and the case may be disposed off as the petitioners are not contesting the conviction part of the judgment but they are only seeking reduction to the period already undergone by the petitioners by enhancing the fine amount to the complainant.

Learned Panel lawyer for the State submits that he is not opposing if the petition is decided as per the prayer because interest of justice has to be done. Therefore, I.A.No.26054/2025 is dismissed a s withdrawn. Copy of judgment of trial Court and first Appellate Court are available on record.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. In RCT No.300692/2015, learned JMFC, Baihar, District - Balaghat in criminal case (State of MP through Police Station Rupjhar, District Balaghat Vs. Messer Tekam and Another) judgment dated 22.1.2022 has convicted the petitioners/accused persons under Section 325/34 of IPC with RI for 18 months and with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of fine, petitioners are further directed to undergo SI for one month.

6 . As per the prosecution story, at about 9.00 PM on 05.12.2014, complainant Charan Singh Tekam was going with his niece on foot, then, near Mata Mandir, suddenly, petitioners came there and on account of some previous rivalry, stated they will finish him and thereafter, they assaulted complainant/injured Charan Singh with wooden stick on complainant's head, cheek, mouth and teeth and ran away from the scene of crime. On hearing commotion, other persons present came there, who took injured/complainant to the District Hospital, Balaghat. From where, information was sent to Police Station-Rupjhar, District- Balaghat and crime no.154/2015 was registered against the petitioners. In X-ray of the complainant, fracture was found. Therefore, offence under Section 325 of IPC was added. After investigation, charge sheet was filed.

When petitioners were charged with the offence as mentioned aforesaid, then, they denied the aforesaid charges leveled against them. After prosecution evidence, when petitioners were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., then, they again stated that they are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the case and nothing has been produced in their defence.

8 . Learned trial Court has convicted the petitioners/accused persons as mentioned above.

9 . Although, revision petitioners are not pressing their revision against conviction but to do justice to the parties, judgments of the trial Court as well as appellate Court are being perused. Learned trial Court has acquitted the petitioners under Sections 294 and 506(Part-II) of IPC but they were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 325/34 of IPC. Prosecution has produced complainant Charan Singh Tekam as PW-1, Anil Uikey as PW-2, Kanti Bai as PW-3, who supported the case of the prosecution. Medical doctor Dr. Geeta Bokde (PW-7) has been examined in the case. Dr. DK Raut (PW-6) has deposed about the X-ray report finding fracture in the jaw region of the injured/complainant Charan Singh Tekam. Investigating Officer (Rameshwar (PW-5) has also deposed and has supported the case of the prosecution. Therefore, on perusal of judgment of trial Court as well as first appellate Court in criminal appeal No.33/2022, judgement dated 13.10.2025 (Mesar Tekam and Anr. Vs. State of MP), conviction under Section 325/34 of IPC is found to be well justified and no interference can be made.

Now the question remains about the quantum of punishment. As per the case of the prosecution, petitioners are in jail since 13.10.2025 after dismissal of their appeal by the Sessions Court. Therefore, petitioners have suffered imprisonment of about 1 month and they have also been fined by the Court below. Looking to the nature of case and it is seen that a quarrel suddenly took place and there was no pre-planning. It was a chance assault due to a previous rivalry between the parties.

11 . Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, aim of justice would be met, if the jail sentence under Section 325/34 of IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioners as mentioned above while raising the fine amount. Therefore, appeal against conviction is dismissed and petitioners instead of the punishment awarded by the trial Court are sentenced under section 325/34 of IPC with the period of imprisonment from 13.10.2025 till date i.e. 11/11/2025 but fine amount is hereby enhanced from Rs.1,000/- each to Rs.10,000/- each in default to undergo imprisonment for two months. In which amount of fine of Rs.1,000/-deposited by the petitioners earlier shall be adjusted and therefore, petitioners are now directed to deposit a sum of Rs.9,000/- each i.e. Rs.18,000/- total which shall be paid to injured. Amount of additional compensation of Rs.18,000/-shall be deposited by the petitioners to the complainant/injured/Charan Singh Tekam before the trial Court within two weeks form today as a pre-condition.

Accordingly, with the aforesaid directions/observations, petition filed by the petitioners are disposed off and partly allowed.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for information and necessary action.