Shaukat vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Roopesh Chandra Varshney, J

The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C”) being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 13/10/2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur in S.T.No.142/2003, whereby appellant has been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo SI for one month with fine of Rs.1,000/- with usual default stipulation.

0 2 . Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged by complainant Crime No.82/2002 has been registered against the appellant at Police Station Saikheda, District Narsinghpur for commission of Offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 34 of I P C . After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court.

After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and appreciating the evidence lead by parties, learned trial Court found the appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal.

4 . Learned counsel for the appellant has expressly gave up his challenge to the findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellant is concerned. In other words, the learned counsel for the appellant accepted the finding of conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged the quantum of punishment alone. It is submitted that the appellant is the only earning person in his family, he is the first offender and counsel assures that he will not involve in such criminal activities in future. It is also submitted that having regard to all circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction and further keeping in view the fact that the appellant is facing the trial before the concerned Court for more than 19 years and short sentence of one month has been awarded to him, therefore, he prayed that his jail sentence be reduced to the period already undergone.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent State has submitted that after appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below has rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no grounds are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant, hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding some force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the finding of his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the findings of conviction of the Court below is legally sustainable or not, I perused the record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no case is made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From the perusal of the record, it reveals that FIR was registered promptly and the complainant has fully supported the prosecution story, therefore, the findings of conviction recorded by the Court below under Section 323 of IPC is upheld.

Now the question arises as to whether the appellant's sentence should be reduced and if so, to what extent as urged by the learned counsel for the appellant.

So far as the period of sentence is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that looking to the fact that the appellant is facing the trial for last more than 19 years and the counsel assures that in future the appellant will not involve in any such offence, therefore, this Court is of the view that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant deserves to be and is hereby reduced to the period of already undergone by him.

The appellant is in jail, therefore, he be released forthwith if not required in any other case.

With the aforesaid modification, present criminal appeal stands allowed in part and disposed of.

Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the Court below for information and necessary compliance.