Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramnathsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 November, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
Bench: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 23rd OF NOVEMBER, 2022
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2142 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
RAMNATHSINGH S/O URJANSINGH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOURER VILLAGE ANVLI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AMAN MOURYA, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER
THR. P.S. KURAWAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAJESH JOSHI, GOVT.ADVOCATE)
This revision coming on for orders this day, the court passed
the following:
ORDER
This criminal revision filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C.has been preferred against the judgment dated 12.8.2021 passed by the Court of 1 st Addl.Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh, District Rajgarh (Biaora) in Cri.Appeal bearing No.126/2021, whereby order dated 27.8.2009 convicting the applicant for the offence punishable 2 under Section 224 of IPC passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narsinghgarh, District Rajgarh (Biaora) was affirmed.
2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that vide judgment dated 30.9.1999 passed by the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh District Rajgarh in S.T.No.64/1988 applicant was convicted for the offences punishable under section 147, 307 r/w 149 and 324 r/w 149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo two years' RI, life imprisonment, ten years' RI with fine amount of Rs.25,000/- with default stipulation. While suffering incarceration period on 28.10.2005 vide letter bearing No.14415 he was released on parole for 23 days from Central Jail, Bhopal. He had to surrender himself on 21.11.2005 for suffering remaining period of sentence, but he did not surrender and abscond. Superintendent, Central Jain, Bhopal made written complaint (Ex.P/7) to SHO, P.S., Kurawar, District Rajgarh (Biaora) on the basis of which on 6.7.2006 Crime bearing No.200/2006 for the offences punishable under Section 188 and 224 of IPC was registered at P.S., Kurawar, District Rajgarh. I.O., ASI, A.S.Choudhary recorded the statements of the witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the applicant before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narsinghgarh, wherein learned trial Court framed charges under Section 188 and 224 of IPC and after conclusion of trial vide impugned judgment dated 27.8.2019 convicted the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 224 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year RI. Applicant filed criminal appeal 3 bearing No.126/2021 before the Court of 1st Addl.Sessions Judge, Narsingharh, which was dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 12.8.2021.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant does not wish to challenge the findings with regard to his conviction. He is confining his arguments only to the extent of period of sentence. He submits that as stated in the impugned judgment dated 27.8.2019 passed by the trial Court i.e. the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class in Criminal Case bearing No.1182/2006. Applicant had suffered about five months incarceration out of one year sentence awarded to him. Admittedly, since his arrest in the aforesaid matter he is in custody. Matter relates to the year 2005-06, therefore, considering the period of custody already suffered by the applicant and also the fact that matter is pending for about more then 16 years. His future will be spoiled in the midst of harden criminals inside the jail and, therefore, prays for reduction of jail sentence to the period already undergone by the applicant.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State, while supporting the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the judgment was passed by the appellate Court after proper appreciation of evidence available on record. Same is well reasoned establishing the guilt of the applicant beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, confirming the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the revision filed by the applicant may be 4 dismissed.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
6. Upon perusal of the record of trial Court this fact appears undisputed that while suffering incarceration of jail sentence awarded to him vide judgment dated 30.9.1999 passed by the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh in S.T.No.64/1988 vide letter dated 26.10.2005 he was released on parole for 23 days and he did not surrender before the Jail Authorities and had absconded. As shown in the complaint (Ex.P/7) forwarded by the Supdt., Central Jail, Bhopal to SHO, P.S., Kurawar, District Rajgarh. The applicant has neither denied the aforesaid fact nor stated anywhere that he surrendered himself before the Jail Authorities after completion of parole period i.e. on 23.11.2005. In view of the aforesaid learned trial court has not committed any error in holding the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 224 of IPC.
7. So far as the sentence awarded to the applicant is concerned, admittedly, offence relates to the year 2005-06 and during the trial of the case he suffered about five months incarceration as mentioned in the impugned judgment dated 27.8.2019 passed by the trial Court i.e. the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narsinghgarh. Admittedly, applicant is in custody since the date of arrest in the case and suffering incarceration of sentence awarded to him by the appellate Court vide judgment dated 12.8.2021 passed by the Court of 5 1st Addl.Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh in Cri.Appeal bearing No.126/2021. In view of the aforesaid, the ends of justice shall be sub- served, if the jail sentence of the applicant is reduced to the period already undergone by him with fine as imposed by the appellate Court.
8. Consequently, this criminal revision is allowed in part. The conviction of the applicant passed by the Trial Court under Section 224 of IPC is maintained. The applicant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him in jail i.e., five months.
With the aforesaid, the criminal revision is disposed of finally. The Registry is directed to send back the trial Court record forthwith alongwith the copy of this judgment. Let a copy of this order be also sent to the concerned jail authorities for its speedy compliance and necessary action.
Patil (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) Digitally signed by JUDGE SHAILESH PATIL Date: 2022.11.24 15:59:35 +05'30'