High Court Madhya Pradesh High Court

Durga Prasad And Ors. vs The State Of M.P on 12 May, 2011

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Durga Prasad And Ors. vs The State Of M.P on 12 May, 2011
                             1




        Criminal Appeal No. 994/1999.

12.05.2011

     Shri      Satish        Chaturvedi,           learned

counsel for appellants.

     Shri     Vivek     Sharma,         learned    PL     for

respondent/State.

Perused PUD dated 30/04/11 in which it

has been shown that appellants have failed

to appear before the trial Court on

23.04.11.

Learned counsel for appellants submits

that matter may be heard finally today to

which learned PL for State has no

objection.

Heard finally.

This is an appeal preferred by the

appellants feeling aggrieved by the

judgment dated 22.03.99, delivered by the

then Special Judge, Raisen in Special Case

No.158/96 in which appellants have been
2

convicted for alleged offence punishable

under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to

R.I.for six months and fine of Rs.500/-

each, in default of payment of fine

appellants to further undergo R.I. for one

month.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has

not challenged the finding of conviction

of the appellant but confined his

arguments only on the point of sentence.

So there is no need to consider the facts

of the case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants

submitted that out of 13 persons who were

tried, these three appellants have been

convicted and sentenced as aforesaid, the

appellants are first offender and there is

no criminal record against them. The

incident is of the year 1993. Therefore,

their case may be considered
3

sympathetically. He submits that alleged

offence under Section 323 IPC is

punishable with fine alone also.

4. On the contrary, learned counsel for

the State has supported the judgment

delivered by the trial Court and contended

that no interference is called for in this

appeal.

5. Keeping in view the facts and

circumstances of this case and submissions

made by the parties, the interest of

justice would be served if the amount of

fine is enhanced in lieu of sentence.

Consequently, the appeal is partly

allowed. The conviction of the appellants

by the trial Court is hereby maintained.

However, instead of jail sentence, I

impose extra fine amount of Rs.1,000/-(Rs.

One Thousand Only) on each appellant. The

said amount be deposited in the trial
4

Court within three months from the date of

receipt of certified copy of this order,

failing which the appellants shall undergo

R.I. for one month. The appellants are on

bail, in case the fine amount is deposited

by them, their bail bonds shall stand

discharged.

(M.A.Siddiqui)
Judge.

Jk.