Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This Criminal Revision under Sections 397, 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant no.1 against the judgment and sentence dated 17/2/2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.179/2011 and the applicant no.2 has filed this revision against the judgment and sentence dated 17/2/2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.258/2011 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Lahar, District Bhind thereby affirming the judgment and sentence dated 19/4/2011 passed by the JMFC, Lahar, District Bhind in Criminal Case No.202/2005 by which the applicants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 452 and 323 of IPC and they have been sentenced to undergo the rigorous imprisonment of four months and a fine of Rs.200/- with default imprisonment for offence under Section 452 of IPC and a fine of Rs.500/- for offence under Section 323 of IPC with default imprisonment.

3. The trial court by order dated 23/11/2005 framed charges against the applicants for offence under Sections 452, 324/34, 323/34 and 506 Part-II of IPC.

4. The applicants abjured their guilt and pleaded not guilty.

5. It appears that during the pendency of the trial the complainant filed an application under Section 320 (2) of Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence against applicant no.1-Kailash. The trial court by order dated 29/11/2010 partially allowed the application and discharged the applicant no.1 for offence under Sections 324/34, 323/34 and 506 Part-II of IPC and directed that the prosecution of the applicant no.1 shall continue for offence under Section 452 as well as for offence under Section 323/34 of IPC for causing injury to Kanhaiyalal.

6. After recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and hearing both the parties, the trial court convicted the applicants for offence under Section 452 as well as for offence under Section 323 of IPC for causing injury to Kanhaiyalal and sentenced the applicants to undergo rigorous imprisonment of four months and a fine of Rs.200/- with default imprisonment for offence under Section 452 of IPC and fine of Rs.500/- with default imprisonment for offence under Section 323 of IPC.

7. Being aggrieved by the judgment and sentenced passed by the trial court, the applicants filed Criminal Appeals, which were registered as Criminal Appeal No.179/2011 and Criminal Appeal No.258/2011 and were decided by common judgment dated 17/2/2012 and the appeals were dismissed.

9. Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that deterrence is the basic feature of sentencing policy, therefore, where the applicants have trespassed and had caused injuries to the injured persons, then no leniency can be shown to the applicants on the question of quantum of sentence.

10. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

10.1 From the record, it is clear that the complainant-Pahalwan had resolved his dispute with the applicant no.1 and had also filed an application under Section 320 (2) of Cr.P.C. before the trial court itself, which was partially allowed and the applicant no.1 was discharged for the offence punishable under Sections 324/34, 323/34 and 506 Part-II of IPC and since the offence under Section 452 of IPC was not compoundable and the other injured-Kanhaiyalal had not filed any application for compounding the offence, therefore, the applicant no.1 was directed to be prosecuted for offence under Sections 452 and 323/34 of IPC.