Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vikky @ Vikas vs The State Of M.P on 13 December, 2011
Author: T.K. Kaushal
Bench: T.K. Kaushal
(1) Cr. Appeal No.1584/2002
Cr. Appeal No.1585/ 2002
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE T.K. KAUSHAL
Criminal Appeal No.1584 OF 2002
Vikky alias Vikas
-Versus-
State of Madhya Pradesh
Criminal Appeal No.1585 OF 2002
Boby alias Ranjit
-Versus-
State of Madhya Pradesh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Appellants : Shri Ranjeet Barkud, Advocate For the State : Shri Pushpraj Singh, Panel Lawyer 13/12/2011 (J U D G M E N T ) Having preferred these appeals against the judgment dated 30.9.2002 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in Sessions Trial No.401/1999, convicting the appellant Boby alias Ranjit under Section 324 of I.P.C. and ap- pellant Vikky alias Vikas under Section 324/34 of I.P.C. sentencing them to one year R.I., this judgment shall govern disposal of the aforesaid both the appeals.
2. Facts of the case, in short, are that on 23.1.99 at about 9 p.m. Premchand Batra (PW-2) while going in his Maruti Van was accosted by the appellants by taking their Tata-Sumo Vehicle in front of his Maruti Van forcefully taken him along with his vehicle towards Ramanuj Daal Mill. PW-2 was assaulted by them with butt of Katta. Some how, PW-2 managed to jump out of (2) Cr. Appeal No.1584/2002 Cr. Appeal No.1585/ 2002 the vehicle and escaped from the captivity of the appellants.
3. Dehati Nalsi Ex.P/2 was lodged by PW-2 against three unknown persons. PW-2 was sent for his medical examination in Government Hospital Katni. Maruti Van of Pw-2 was found lying in Indra Avas Gram and seized by the Police vide Ex.P/7. Appellants were arrested on 2.2.1999. Katta (Revolver) was seized from the possession of the appellant Boby alias Ranjit. F.I.R. Ex.P/ 8 was registered at Police Station Madhav Nagar Katni against unknown persons under Section 394 of IPC. On 16.2.1999, Test Identification Parade of the appellant was conducted and they were identified correctly by Premchandra Batra (PW-2).
4. Completing investigation, citing 14 witnesses, Police Madhav Nagar, Katni, submitted charge sheet against appellants and others, under Sections 394, 398, 364, 120-B of I.P.C. r/w Section 25(1)(b) & 27 of the Arms Act in the Court of concerned Magistrate. Trial Court framed charge under Sections 392, 394, 398, 397 of I.P.C. Against appellant Ranjit a charge under Section 25(1)(b) of Arms Act was also framed. Appellants abjured guilt. They pleaded false implication.
5. To substantiate the case of prosecution, statements of V.P. Dubey, Executive Magistrate (PW-1), Premchandra Batra, injured (PW-2), Dr. S.K. Sharma (PW-3), P. Kujur, Arms Clerk (PW-4), Kamal Kumar Jotwani (PW-5), Anoop Dubey, ASI (PW-6), Mohan Lal, father (PW-7), Krishna Kumar (PW-8), Raghuveer (PW-9), Shyamlal (PW-10), Jaharul Islam, Constable (PW-11), Satya Vrata Pandey, S.H.O. (PW-12), Girish Khare, (PW-13) and Vijay Kumar, Head Constable (PW-14) were recorded.
6. Appreciating the aforesaid evidence, trial Court acquitted the appellants of all the aforesaid charges however convicted them under Section (3) Cr. Appeal No.1584/2002 Cr. Appeal No.1585/ 2002 324 and 324/34 of I.P.C. as mentioned above.
7. These appeals have been preferred, challenging the findings of the trial Court on the grounds that appreciation of evidence is not proper. Trial Court has found evidence doubtful and insufficient in respect of all the charges framed against them and acquitted them under Sections 392, 394, 397 and 398 of I.P.C. Hence conviction under Section 324 of IPC is not sustainable. On the other hand learned Panel Lawyer supported the findings of conviction and sentence both.
8. Admittedly State has not preferred any appeal in respect of impugned judgment to challenge the acquittal of the appellants of the charges under Sections 392, 394, 397, 398 of IPC.
9. In view of the evidence of Premchandra Batra, injured (PW-2 ) and Dr. S.K. Sharma (PW-3), it is obviously clear that Premchand Batra sustained nine injuries on his person. Out of those, three injuries were incised wounds. MLC report Ex.P/4 reveals that aforesaid all injuries were simple in nature and remaining injuries were superficial also.
10. I see no perversity in findings of the trial Court in so far as conviction of appellants under Section 324 and/or 324/34 of I.P.C. is concerned. At this stage, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that this is an incident about 12 years ago and no useful purpose would be served by sending the appellants again in jail for serving out remaining jail sentence. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that after this incident for last about 12 years, nothing has been reported against the appellants to show their bad antecedents.
11. Pending investigation, trial and appeal, appellant Boby alias Ranjit had suffered custody of more than 7 months (220 days) and appellant Vikky (4) Cr. Appeal No.1584/2002 Cr. Appeal No.1585/ 2002 alias Vikas had suffered custody of more than 2 months (67 days).
12. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, argument of learned counsel on the point of sentence for the appellants inspires the confidence. For an offence under Section 324 and 324/34 of IPC. Period of sentence had undergone by them seems to be just and proper. In addition to aforesaid undergone jail sentence, fine of Rs.1000/- on each is also imposed. Above such sentence will serve the purpose and will meet the ends of the justice. In default of fine appellants shall under go three months R.I..
13. Appeals are partly allowed on the point of sentence as indicated above.
14. Appellants are directed to remain present before the trial court on or before 11.1.2012 to deposit the fine amount or to undergo default sentence, as the case may be.
(T.K. KAUSHAL) JUDGE irfan (5) Cr. Appeal No.1584/2002 Cr. Appeal No.1585/ 2002