Nannu @ Mukesh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

N.K. Gupta, J.—The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 24.4.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh in criminal appeal No. 1/2004, whereby the conviction directed against the applicant for the offence punishable u/s 324 of IPC was maintained but, sentence was reduced to the period of Till Rising Court with fine of Rs. 3,000/-. The prosecution''s case, in short, is that, on 30.4.2000, at about 11.30 p.m., the victim Gulzar Prasad who was a co-teacher and also co-brother of the applicant was lying in his house, situated at village Laklaka (Police Station Tejgarh, District-Damoh), after taking his dinner. The applicant was also sleeping in the house but, in the night, the applicant raised and assaulted the victim Gulzar Prasad by a dagger at two places. On his shouting, the applicant ran away from the spot. The victim lodged an FIR, Ex. P/1 at outpost-Imaliya, Police Station Tejgarh, District-Damoh. The victim was examined by the doctors and after due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed.

The applicant abjured his guilt. In defence, Keshav Prasad (D.W. 1), Ramswaroop (D.W. 2), Gopal Singh (D.W. 3), Nand Kishore (D.W. 4) and Gayatri (D.W. 5) were examined.

The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Damoh, after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, vide judgment dated 17.12.2003 convicted the applicant for the offence punishable u/s 324 of IPC and sentenced him with 1 year''s rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In criminal appeal, the jail sentence of the applicant was reduced, whereas, fine amount was enhanced.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The applicant challenges the sentence only. The learned senior Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is a teacher and if any jail sentence or fine is imposed upon him then, he may lose his job, therefore, looking to his position, he may be released on probation. The contention advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant can be accepted because the applicant has faced the trial, appeal and the present revision since last 12 years. He is a teacher and if the jail sentence of Till rising Court is kept intact then, he may lose his job. Under such circumstances, it would be proper to release the applicant on probation but, some compensation may be awarded to the victim.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the revision filed by the applicant is hereby partly allowed. The conviction directed against the applicant for the offence punishable u/s 324 of IPC is hereby maintained but, looking to the job of the applicant, his sentence is set aside. He be released on probation. It is directed that if the applicant furnishes a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) according to the conditions of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act for a period of 6 months before the trial Court alongwith the surety bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court then, the applicant shall be released on probation for that period. If bond or bail bond is not furnished before the trial Court then, sentence awarded by the appellate Court shall remain intact. Also, it is directed that the applicant shall deposit a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- before the trial Court, so that it may be provided to the victim Gulzar S/o Balla Ahirwar, R/o Village Laklaka, Police Station Tejgarh, District-Damoh. The previous fine amount deposited will be adjusted towards the compensation amount. The compensation amount be deposited within 2 months from today before the trial Court, thereafter, the applicant may submit his bond and bail bond relating to the provisions of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. If compensation is deposited, it may be provided to the victim. A copy of the order be sent to the trial Court as well as to the appellate Court along with their records for information and compliance.