Sonu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

@JUDGEMENTTAG- JUDGEMENT

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J

This is first criminal appeal filed under section 14A (1) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Rajgarh (Biaora) District Rajgarh in Special Case No.142/2019, whereby, the appellant has been convicted under section 323 of IPC and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to undergo 06 - 06 months RI with fine Rs.1000, 2000/-.

The facts of the case are that on 13/07/2019, at about 8:00 P.M., complainant Sultan Singh lodged report that after doing market, he was returning back to his house. When he reached near culvert at Chhapi Dam, one Sonu Mewade came and abused him. The complainant asked him to not to abuse, upon this, Sonu assaulted the complainant with stone, blood oozed out. Ramesh and complainants wife Kalabai reached at the spot and intervened. After that, Sonu fled away from the spot. The matter was reported to police and report is registered. After investigation police has filed charge-sheet before the Special Court. The learned trial court has framed charges against the appellant u/s 294, 323, 506 Part-II of I.P.C. and u/s 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of The Schedule Caste and The Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Appellant has abjured the guilt. Prosecution lead their evidence and after completion of trial, learned trial court has acquitted the appellant from offence punishable u/s 294, 506 Part-II of I.P.C. and u/s 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of The Schedule Caste and The Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 but convicted the appellant Sonu U/s 323 of LP.C. and 3(2)(va) of The Schedule Caste and The Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced him as mentioned here-in-above.

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not challenging the order of conviction on merits but is confining his challenge on the question of sentence. It is submitted that under section 323 of IPC no mandatory jail sentence is prescribed and as per the provision of section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act same sentence is prescribed which is for the substantive section of IPC under which the accused is convicted.

It is submitted that the incident had taken place in the year 2019. The appellant has already remained in jail for the period of five days. Since no mandatory jail sentence is prescribed, no purpose would be served in sending the appellant in jail after such long period. Instead of jail sentence, the fine amount may be enhanced, which may be directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation.

Learned counsel for the respondent/state supports the order of conviction and sentence.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, so far the conviction of the appellant is concerned, the same has been proved by prosecution beyond doubt by testimony of PW-2 Sultan Singh, PW-4 Nisha Reddy Investigating Officer. So far question of sentence is concerned, the incident is of year 2019 and no mandatory jail sentence is prescribed under section 323 of IPC which is to be read with section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.

While maintaining the conviction of the appellant, the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone and fine amount under section 323 of IPC is enhanced from Rs.1000- to Rs.5000- and under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, the fine amount is enhanced from Rs.2000- to Rs.5000- The enhanced fine amount shall be deposited within the period of three months from today. The suspension of jail sentence shall continue for the period of three months on the same terms and conditions as directed by the trial Court. If the fine amount is not deposited within the said period, the appellant shall surrender and undergo the remaining jail sentence.

Out of the enhanced fine amount, Rs.4000/- under section 323 of IPC and Rs.3000/- under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act shall be paid to the complainant Sultan Singh by the trial Court.

With the aforesaid, the present appeal stands partly allowed and disposed off.