Madhya Pradesh High Court
Soneram Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 December, 2022
Author: Sunita Yadav
Bench: Sunita Yadav
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
JUDGEMENT DATED 6th DECEMBER, 2022
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022
Between:-
1. SONERAM JATAV S/O SHRI NACTURAM ADIVASI, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER, R/O GRAM
THEVLA PS GOVERDHAN DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. RAJA @ RAJPUT S/O SONERAM ADIVASI, AGED ABOUT 23
YEARS, R/O. GRAM THEVLA, POLICE STATION GOVERDHAN,
DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ANAND S/O SHRI SONERAM ADIVASI, AGED ABOUT 22
YEARS, R/O GRAM THEVLA, POLICE STATION GOVERDHAN,
DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY MR. AVADESH PARASHAR - ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION P.S. GOVERDHAN DISTRICT SHIVPURI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
..... RESPONDENT
( BY MR. R.K. AWASTHI - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
This revision coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:-
ORDER
1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioners under section 397 r/w section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated 17/09/2022 Signature passed by Sessions Judge, District Shivpuri in Cr.A. No. 164/2022 Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR affirming the judgment dated 23/03/2022 passed in Regular Criminal Trial No. Signing time: 12-12-2022 10:19:00 AM CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 2 327/2018 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pohari, District Shivpuri, whereby, the learned trial Court convicted the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 323/34 of IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo simple imprisonment for Six Months with fine of Rs. 500/- each with default stipulation and acquitted them from the offence punishable under section 294, 506 of IPC.
2. As per prosecution story, short facts of the case leading to filing of this criminal revision are that the complainant namely Kailash on 11/10/2018 at about 9 Pm in the night was sitting on the platform situated in front of his house, at that time, the accused persons came and without any rhyme and reason started absuing him with obscene words, which was opposed by him, due to which, the accused persons started quarelling with him, on which, complainant's wife namely Urmila and his daughter Surja came at the spot of incident and they tried to pacify the matter. Thereafter, the accused Anand assaulted the victim Urmila by means of Sariya, which hit on back side of her head, due to which, she sustained injuries and blood started oozing out. The accused Soneram assaulted the victim Surja by his leg which hit on her face and eyes, due to which, she sustained injuries and blood started oozing out. Thereafter, Sanjay and Bharat Jatav who were present on the spot and had seen the incident rescued the complainant party. Thereafter, all the accused persons went away from the spot of incident and threatened the complainant party to kill. Thereafter, the complainant on 12/10/2018 lodged the Signature Not Verified report at police station Goverdhan, District Shivpuri. Signed by: SANJAY
NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR On lodging of F.I.R.,
Signing time: 12-12-2022
10:19:00 AM
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 3
criminal law was triggered and set in motion, investigation agency arrived at spot, the injured were sent for medical examination, recorded the statements of the eye- witnesses; prepared the spot map; arrested the accused persons and after completion of all due formalities, the charge sheet was submitted before the trial Court having criminal jurisdiction.
3. The learned trial Court framed the charges against the petitioners for the offence punishable under sections 294, 323 (two counts) in alternative section 323 r/w section 34 (two counts) & 506 Part - 11 of IPC, which were denied by them. In order to bring home the charges, prosecution has examined as many as Seven witnesses (PW- 1 to PW-7) and placed Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-5 documents on record. The defence of accused is of false implication and the same defence has been put forth by them in their statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.
4. The learned trial Court after hearing learned counsel for the rival parties and after appreciating the evidence available on record vide judgment dated 23/03/2022 passed in Regular Criminal Trial No. 327/2018 convicted the petitioners for the offence punishable under section 323/34 of IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for Six Months with fine of Rs. 500/- each with default stipulation. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed an appeal bearing Cr. A. No. 164/2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, District Shivpuri. The learned lower appellate Court after hearing learned counsel for the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY rival parties vide impugned judgment dated 17/09/2022 affirmed the judgment NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 12-12-2022 10:19:00 AM CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 4 dated 23/03/2022 passed by the trial Court, against which, the present revision is filed.
5. Learned counsel for the accused/petitioners argued that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case. It is further argued that there are omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that prosecution has not examined any independent witness, but only interested witnesses have been examined. It is further argued that the petitioners are facing the criminal proceedings from the date of incident i.e. 11/10/2018 to till date and are suffering physically and mentally for the same and the petitioners No. 1 & 2 have already served total incarceration of approximately 25 days and the petitioner No. 3 has already served total incarceration of approximately 80 days till date out of total awarded maximum sentence of Six months to each of them. It is further argued that the injury caused to the complainant can be self inflicted or the same can be caused due to falling down on the ground, but the learned trial Court has ignored this important aspect of the matter and has convicted the petitioners vide impugned judgment. On these grounds, it is prayed that the revision filed by the petitioners deserves to be allowed and the judgment of conviction deserves to be set aside.
6. In alternative leaned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners No. 1 & 2 have already served total incarceration of approximately 25 days and Signature Not Verified the petitioner No. 3 has already served total incarceration of approximately 80 Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 12-12-2022 10:19:00 AM CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 5 days till date out of total awarded maximum sentence of Six months to each of them. It is submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the fact that petitioners have already served substantive part of jail sentence, the same may be reduced to the period already undergone and the amount of fine may reasonably be enhanced.
7. Learned counsel for respondent/State submits that after due appreciation of evidence, learned Court below has found the offence proved against the petitioners, which requires no interference. It is submitted that the revision filed by the petitioners be dismissed.
8. From perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that no illegality has been committed by the learned Courts below in convicting the petitioners, hence the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Courts below requires no interference and the same is hereby maintained.
9. So far as the period of sentence is concerned, looking to the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners and the nature of offence and the fact that petitioners are facing the criminal proceedings since 2018 and have already served substantive period of jail sentence, the purpose would be served in case the jail sentence awarded to the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone. However, for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC, the petitioners are directed to pay compensation as Rs. 3,000/- each in addition to the fine already Signature Not Verified imposed by the trial Court. Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 12-12-2022 10:19:00 AM CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 3664/2022 6
10. In the result, this criminal revision is partly allowed. The findings of conviction are hereby maintained with the modification to the extent that the jail sentence awarded to the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone subject to depositing fine amount as imposed by the Courts below as well as additional amount of compensation of Rs. 3,000/- each, total additional compensation amount of Rs. 9,000/-, out of which, an amount of Rs. 5,000/- shall be payable to the injured Urmila and an amount of Rs. 4,000/- shall be payable to the injured Surja within a period of two months, failing which, the petitioners shall suffer jail sentence awarded by the learned Court below. The petitioners No. 1 & 2 are on bail. Their bail bonds stand discharged. The petitioner No. 3 is in jail. He be released and set free, if not required in any other case.
11. With the aforesaid modification, the instant criminal revision stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE Durgekar* Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 12-12-2022 10:19:00 AM