Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 249 (MP)

Vinay Pandey v. State of M. P.

2014-02-28

N.K.GUPTA

body2014
ORDER 1. The applicants were convicted for two counts charges of offence punishable under section 323 of IPC and each of them was sentenced with fine of Rs.1,000/- for each count charge vide judgment dated 21.7.2009 passed by the learned JMFC, Rewa in Criminal Case No.350/2005, whereas Criminal Appeal No.237/2009 was dismissed in toto vide order dated 23.4.2010 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgments, the applicants have preferred the present revision. 2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that, on 14.6.2004, at about 7 p.m., the victim Ananti Devi was sitting in front of her house, situated at Amba (Police Station Sagra, District Rewa). She was accompanied with her daughter Meena and Son Manish. The applicants went to the spot and due to previous enmity, they started assaulting the victim Ananti Devi. When Manish intervened in the matter then, he was also assaulted. A report was lodged at outpost-SGMH Hospital. Dr.A.M.Trivedi (PW 5) examined the victims Ananti Devi and Manish and gave his reports Ex.P/1 and Ex.P/3. He found 4 injuries to each of the victims. However, the injuries were not found grave. The charge-sheet was filed after due investigation. 3. The applicants abjured their guilt. They took a plea that they were falsely implicated in the matter. To show such type of previous reports, Head Constable Shri Rajkumar Mishra (DW 1) was examined in defence. 4. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties, the learned JMFC, convicted and sentenced the applicants as mentioned above, whereas the appeal filed by the applicants was dismissed in toto. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. In the present case, the testimony of the victim Ananti Devi (PW 1) and Manish (PW 7) was duly confirmed by the witnesses Ku.Meena (PW 4) and Prem Lal Pandey (PW2). Also their version is duly confirmed by timely lodged FIR, Ex.P/7. Dr.Tripathi (PW 6) found the injuries to both the victims on the same portion, where they had stated about the assault and therefore, medical reports of these victims corroborate their evidence. It is proved beyond doubt that each of the applicants participated in the crime and they assaulted the victims Ananti Devi and Manish. 7. The applicants did not take any defence of right of private defence or sudden or grave provocation. They had assaulted the victims with sticks etc. It is proved beyond doubt that each of the applicants participated in the crime and they assaulted the victims Ananti Devi and Manish. 7. The applicants did not take any defence of right of private defence or sudden or grave provocation. They had assaulted the victims with sticks etc. and they knew about the sort of result they would have caused to the victims Ananti Bai and Manish. Under such circumstances, the learned JMFC has rightly convicted the applicants for two counts charges of offence punishable under section 323 of IPC. 8. So far as the sentence is concerned, a lenient view has already been taken by the trial Court and therefore, no further leniency can be done. However, the learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant No.3 Rampal Pandey is in government services and if he is not released on probation then, conviction as well as the sentence would create harm to his job. Under such circumstances, it would be proper to release the applicant No.3 on probation under section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act. However, fine amount deposited by the applicant No.3 shall be treated as a compensation given under section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act. 9. On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the revision filed by the applicants is hereby partly allowed for the applicant No.3 but, it is dismissed for the remaining applicants. The conviction for two counts charges for offence punishable under section 323 of IPC is hereby maintained for the applicant No.3 but, he shall be released on probation under section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act after giving due admonition etc. Fine amount deposited by the applicant No.3 shall be counted as compensation under section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act. It is further directed that out of the fine deposited by the applicants, the victims Ananti Devi and Manish each shall get a sum of Rs.2,500/- as a compensation in the present case. The trial Court is directed to intimate the victims for payment of the compensation to them. 10. The applicants are on bail. Their presence is no more required before this Court and therefore, it is directed that their bail bonds shall stand discharged. 11. A copy of the order be sent to both the Courts below along with their records for information and compliance.