Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhupendra Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 March, 2021
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 MP 1680
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 CRR-694-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR-694-2021
(BHUPENDRA PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 18-03-2021
Shri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Amit Pandey, learned PL for the respondent/State.
This revision has been filed against the judgment dated 25/2/2021 passed by Additional Session Judge Sagar, District- Sagar, (M.P.) in Cri. Appeal No.185/2019 whereby learned ASJ affirmed the judgement of conviction dated 01/11/2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagar, District-Sagar in RCT No.2178/2017 whereby learned JMFC found applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for six months with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.
As per the prosecution case, on 06/08/2017 at around 09:30 am applicant Bhupendra Patel abused and threatened the complainant Rahul Prajapati and Smt. Radha, Ku. Anjali, when they objected, applicant Bhupendra Patel assaulted Rahul Prajapti by stick, due to which he sustained grievous injury in his little finger of left hand. On the report of Rahul Prajapati police registered Crime No.430/2017 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506 of the IPC and investigated the matter. After investigation police filed charge sheet against the applicant. On that RCT No.2178/2017 has been registered. Learned trial Court framed charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 325, 294, 506 (B) of the IPC and tried the case. Applicant abjured his guilt and took the defence that he is innocent and falsely been implicated in the offence. After the trial learned JMFC acquitted the applicant from the charge punishable under Section 294, 506B of the IPC, however found the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. Being aggrieved from the judgment, applicant filed Criminal Appeal Signature Not Verified SAN No.185/2019, which was dismissed. Being aggrieved from that judgment, Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2021.03.18 18:07:03 IST 2 CRR-694-2021 applicant filed this criminal revision.
Although, apart from the quantum of sentence, the applicant in this revision also challenged the legality of the conviction, but during the course of the arguments learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he did not want to press the revision on the finding of conviction.
Otherwise also from the evidence produced by the prosecution finding the conviction of trial Court as well as appellate Court under Section 325 of IPC appears to be correct. So finding the conviction of trial Court is confirmed.
On the point of sentence, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant/accused is first offender. It is submitted that the applicant was on bail during trial and he never misused the liberty granted to him. The applicant has been in custody since 25/2/2021. Further, the applicant has no criminal past, nor was he involved in any unlawful activities subsequent to this incident. So he be released on sentence already undergone.
Certainly, the pre and past incidents, conduct of the appellant, cannot be lost sight of and can be taken as mitigating circumstances. So looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 25/01/2021, the substantive jail sentence of imprisonment is reduced to one months S.I. in place of six months S.I. and the sentence of fine is set aside and in lieu of fine it is directed that applicant to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant/injured Rahul Prajapati under Section 357 (3) of CrPC which shall be payable to the injured Rahul Prajapati. In default of payment of compensation amount applicants shall suffer one months' S.I. The amount already deposited by the applicant in lieu of a fine be adjusted in compensation amount.
The impugned judgment of the trial Court as well as the appellate Court are modified accordingly.
Hence, this revision petition is partly allowed in the terms indicated Signature Not Verified SAN above.
Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2021.03.18 18:07:03 IST3 CRR-694-2021 A copy of this order be sent to the Court of JMFC, Sagar, District Sagar for information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE VS Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2021.03.18 18:07:03 IST