Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jittu Alias Jitendra Alias Mangal Baba vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 October, 2018
1 CRA-4167-2018
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-4167-2018
(JITTU ALIAS JITENDRA ALIAS MANGAL BABA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 10-10-2018
Shri Madan Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Aseem Dixit, G.A. for the respondent/ State.
Heard.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment dated 7.8.2015 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Damoh, in Sessions Trial No.31/2013, whereby the learned court below has convicted the appellant for the offence under section 394 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 3 years along with fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation.
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not press the appeal on the findings of conviction and sentence on merits. His prayer is limited to the effect that prior to the present conviction and sentence vide judgment dated 7.8.2015, the appellant was already convicted and sentenced by Third Addl. Sessions Judge, Damoh in Sessions Trial No.340/2011 vide judgment dated 26.3.2015 for the offence under sections 450, 328 and 394 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/-, R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/- respectively and is undergoing the sentence. Learned trial court has not taken the aforesaid facts into consideration and has failed to pass any order whether the sentence passed in the present case be run concurrently or after completion of the sentence passed in the previous case. Therefore, in the present case, period of sentence is not running, which would cause grave injustice to the appellant. Hence, the judgment with regard to sentence be modified to the effect that the sentence in the present case be run concurrently with the sentence passed in Sessions Trial No.340/2011.
Learned G.A. has stated that the order with regard to mode of sentence is the discretionary power of the court. Hence, the G.A. has no objection if the prayer made by the appellant is accepted.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in view of this Court, the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant appears to be reasonable. Hence, the same is accepted. The finding of conviction and sentenced imposed by the court below for the offence under section 394 I.P.C. is hereby confirmed with a direction that sentence of imprisonment awarded in this case be run concurrently with the previous sentence of imprisonment passed in Sessions Trial No.340/2011.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial court with the direction that Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF Date: 11/10/2018 18:10:36 2 CRA-4167-2018 supersession warrant be issued accordingly.
In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. Record of the court below be sent back.
C.C.as per rules.
(J. P. GUPTA) JUDGE HS Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF Date: 11/10/2018 18:10:36