Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohd. Yunus vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 9 July, 2013
Criminal Appeal No.995/2013
09.07.2013
Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, learned counsel for
the appellant.
Shri B.P. Pandey, Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/ State.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard finally.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment dated 09.02.2012 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla in S.T. No.47/2010, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 324 and 435 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulations. Jail sentences shall run concurrently.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction recorded by the trial Court. He further submits that appellant had already suffered jail sentence of 2 years 2 months and 7 days and the ends of justice would be met, his jail sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by him. He further prays for reduction of the fine amount.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent/State has supported the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and I have perused the impugned judgment along with the evidence recorded by the trial Court. Since the learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction recorded by the trial Court, therefore, there is no need to state the facts of the case elaborately. In these circumstances, the conviction recorded by the trial Court under Section 324, 435 of I.P.C. is hereby affirmed. It is apparent from the record that appellant is a very poor person, therefore, despite his order of suspension of jail sentence, he could not manage the surety and still he is in jail.
Considering the aforesaid aspect of the case, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met, if the jail sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him and the fine amount is also be reduced to Rs.100/- on each count.
Thus, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction recorded under Sections 324 and 435 of IPC against the appellant is hereby affirmed. However, the sentence recorded against the appellant is hereby reduced to the period of 2 years 2 months and 7 days, already undergone by him and fine is reduced to Rs.100/- on each count. In default of payment of fine, appellant shall suffer jail sentence of 15 days.
Appellant is in jail. He be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this order for compliance and necessary action.
C.C. as per rules.
(G.S.Solanki) JUDGE gn