Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ballu @ Baldeo Singh vs The State Of M.P on 6 November, 2012
1 Cr.A. No.2645/1998
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2645/1998
APPELLANT : Ballu alias Baldev Singh,
Son of Kishore Singh
Resident of Village Palohi,
PS Symariya, District Panna
M.P.
Versus
RESPONDENT: State of Madhya Pradesh through
PS Simariya, District Panna, M.P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appellant by Shri Som Mishra , Advocate.
Respondent/State by Shri Amit Pandey, Public Prosecutor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
(06.11.2012) Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.10.1998 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Panna in S.T. No. 93/1997 convicting the appellant under Section 325 of IPC and thereby sentencing him to suffer RI of two years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default further RI of two months, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. The facts in detail are already narrated in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment and for convenience they are not being reproduced here. Suffice it to say that appellant was charged under Section 307 IPC, however, he has been convicted under Section 325 IPC.
2 Cr.A. No.2645/1998
3. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that looking to the evidence placed on record, it is not proved that appellant has committed any offence. Alternative submission has also been put forth by him that if this Court comes to the conclusion that appellant has committed the offence, in that since since the incident occurred 15 years ago, it would not be fruitful to send the appellant behind the bars again. It is also contended by him that appellant has already suffered jail sentence of 54 days and this would be the appropriate punishment for the offence which he has committed.
4. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor argued in support of the impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal of this appeal.
5. Having learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this appeal deserves to be allowed in part.
6. In the present case, the injured is Charan Singh (PW-1). According to him on the date of incident, his cattle entered inside the field and damaged the crop of appellant as a result of which he was warded off the cattle. At this point some altercation took place between the appellant and the injured as a result of which the appellant dealt three lathi blows on different parts of the body including the head. Although this injured was cross examined at length but nothing has been carved out in 3 Cr.A. No.2645/1998 order to disbelieve his statement. The evidence of this witness is corroborated by the evidence of Dr. R.K. Athya (PW-3) who found following injuries upon the injured mentioned in MLC report (Ex. P/12):-
(i) lacerated wound ½ x ½ x 1/3 cm. on the fore side of scalp;
(ii) contusion 8x1 cm on the fore arm;
(iii) contusion 7x1cm, 1 cm below to the injury no.2;
(iv) contusion 4x1 cm on the fore scapular region.
The injured was referred to radiological examination who found fracture in between occipito parietal junction. Dr. H.S. Sharma (PW-10) has also proved the Medico legal X-ray report (Ex. P/7), therefore, I am of the view that learned Trial Court did not commit any error in convicting the appellant under Section 325 IPC. Appellant has already suffered jail sentence of 54 days. However, at the same time the interest of injured is also to be seen so that he may also get justice and, therefore, it would be justifiable to enhance the fine amount from ` 500/- to ` 10,000 (Rupees ten thousand only). Let the balance amount of ` 9, 500 (Rupees nine thousand and five hundred only) shall be deposited by the appellant on or before 28.2.2013 in the Trial Court, failing which he shall further undergo one year RI. Let the entire amount be paid to injured Charan Singh, S/o Bhan Singh, R/o Mazra Thana, Simariya, District Panna who was examined as PW-1 in the Trial Court towards compensation under Section 4 Cr.A. No.2645/1998 357 of Cr.P.C. Learned Trial Court is hereby directed to do the needful in this regard. The bail bonds of this appellant shall stand cancelled only after he deposits entire amount of fine on or before said date.
7. Appellant is hereby directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 17.12.2012 and shall deposit the balance amount of fine. If appellant is unable to deposit the balance amount on this date or deposits only part of the entire amount, learned Trial Court shall give a date to him to deposit the remaining amount and if on that date also, the appellant fails to deposit the amount, a further date may be given but that date should not exceed beyond 28.02.2013 and by this date appellant should deposit the balance fine amount, failing which he shall undergo the jail sentence of one year RI. In case appellant fails to appear before learned Trial Court on 17.12.2012, the Trial Court shall issue notice to his surety and may pass necessary order against him in accordance with law. After depositing the amount of fine or sending the appellant to jail, the Trial Court shall intimate the Registry of this Court. The Registry is hereby directed to send the original bail bonds papers to learned Trial Court and a photocopy thereof be retained in this file. It is further made clear that after entire amount of fine is deposited by the appellant. his bail bonds shall stand cancelled 5 Cr.A. No.2645/1998
8. Resultantly, this appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed in part. The conviction of appellant under Section 325 IPC is hereby affirmed, however, the sentence is hereby modified to the extent indicated hereinabove. Appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand discharged.
(A.K. Shrivastava) Judge rao