Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 467 (MP)

Narayan v. State of M. P.

2019-07-01

SHAILENDRA SHUKLA

body2019
ORDER 1. This matter is listed today for consideration of IA No.4957/2019, which is an application for suspension of sentence. 2. This is second application for suspension of sentence. The earlier application having been dismissed on 23.4.2019. The applicants have been convicted under sections 148, 323/149 and 325/149 of IPC and sentenced to under go 1 year's RI and fine of Rs. 2,000-00; 2 months' RI and fine of Rs. 200-00 and 1 year's RI and fine of Rs. 2,000-00 each respectively with default sentences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that instead of making submissions on application for suspension of sentence, final submissions shall be made by hear. 4. This prayer is allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that she does not controvert the order of conviction, however, makes a submission on the quantum of sentence. She submits that the applicants have already been in jail since 4 months and 5 days in all and this period be considered adequate sentence in the matter. 6. Learned counsel for the State was also heard who submits that in case prayer is being allowed regarding reduction of jail sentence, the corresponding enhancement of fine amount be ordered to be made. 7. Considered. 8. The prosecution story was that on 10.9.2010, the complainant Banaras Bai was questioned by the applicants that her nephew had taken mobile phone of the applicants. This was opposed by Banaras Bai and she managed to escape and return to her home. However, her brother, namely Sardar Singh thereafter went to the house of the applicants and asked the applicants as to why they were making false allegations against the complainant. This led to resorting to physical assault by the applicants, consequent to which 3 persons, namely Bhuribai, Ratanbai and Shailendra suffered simple injuries; two others, namely Sardar Singh and Bhagwan Singh received grievous injury. The matter was reported and after investigation, chargesheet was filed and the Trial Court i.e. Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahidpur, District Ujjain in R.C.T.No. 807/2010 on 28.3.2018 convicted and sentenced the applicants, as stated above. The appellate Court i.e. second Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Criminal Appeal No. 192/2018 vide judgment dated 19.3.2019 has affirmed the order of conviction and modified the quantum of sentence as already stated earlier. 9. The appellate Court i.e. second Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Criminal Appeal No. 192/2018 vide judgment dated 19.3.2019 has affirmed the order of conviction and modified the quantum of sentence as already stated earlier. 9. In view of the fact that order of conviction has not been challenged, the matter was considered in the light of such submissions and depositions were perused. There is no primafacie impropriety in the order of conviction. The same is affirmed. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, after due consideration and in view of the submissions and also the fact that out of 1 year's RI imposed jail sentence, 4 months and 5 days have already been suffered by the applicants, it would be appropriate to limit the quantum of sentence to that already undergone with corresponding enhancement of fine and instead of fine amount of Rs. 2,000-00 imposed under section 148 of IPC, further fine amount of Rs. 5,000-00 on each of the applicant is being imposed. Thus, each of the applicant shall be liable to pay Rs. 5,000-00 additional to that already imposed in respect of offence under section 148 of IPC. Similarly in respect of 325/149 of IPC, in addition to the already imposed fine of Rs. 2,000-00, the each of the applicants shall be further liable to pay Rs. 5,000-00 extra. The applicants have already suffered punishment in respect of offence under section 323/149 of IPC, therefore, no direction is being made concerning this offence. 10. Thus, all the four applicants shall be liable to pay in total Rs. 40,000-00 additional amount. On failure to pay Rs. 5,000-00 in respect either of the offence under sections 148 and 325/149 of IPC, additional jail sentence of 6 months shall be suffered. 11. It is order that out of Rs. 40,000-00 so recovered, Sardar Singh and Bhagwansingh shall be paid Rs. 10,000-00 each and other injured persons, namely Bhuribai, Ratanbai and Shailendra shall be paid Rs. 5,000-00 each. 12. With this modification in7 the quantum of sentence so far as fine amount is concerned, this revision stands disposed of finally in the above terms. 13. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court along with the record of the Trial Court for compliance. The order pertaining to disposal of the property as pronounced by the trial Court and the appellate Court stand affirmed.