Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 505 (MP)

Pramod Singh v. State of M. P.

2019-07-11

S.K.AWASTHI

body2019
ORDER 1. This criminal appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "The Code") is preferred against the judgment dated 25.10.2018 passed by Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, District Ujjain in Sessions Trial No. 583/2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under section 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 5 years R.I with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and usual default stipulation. 2. Relevant facts in nutshell are that on 22.3.2010, at about 9.00 am when complainant Kailash Prajapat was chatting with one Lokendra Singh in front of his house then applicant Pramod Singh came there and informed that he would like to talk with the complainant and took him in his motorcycle. On reaching near the culvert in Nazarpur Road, he stopped the vehicle and asked the complainant whether he abused his brother Mangalsingh. On being refused by the complainant the applicant started abusing the complainant and took knife and gave a blow on complainant's neck and on the right side of his back, due to which he sustained injury. Thereafter he fled away towards Nazarpur in co-accused Zarak's motorcycle. Complainant filed complaint at Police-Station Gatiya, on the basis of which Police registered FIR at crime No. 573/2016 for offence under section 294, 307, 120B of IPC. Injured Kailash Prajapat was sent for medical examination. During investigation the applicant was arrested and a knife was seized and sent to Forensic Science Lab for analysis. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the applicant before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ujjain, who committed the case to Sessions Judge, Ujjain, which was transferred to Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain for trial. 3. Appellant abjured his guilt and took a plea that he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. However, he has not examined any witnesses in his defence. 4. Trial Court after considering the submissions advance by the counsel for the parties and scrutinizing the entire evidence on record, convicted the appellant for offence under section 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 5 years R.I with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and usual default stipulation. Being aggrieved with this order the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 5. During the pendency of the present appeal a joint interlocutory application of compromise has been filed on behalf of the parties in which prayer has been made for recording the compromise. 6. 1,000/- and usual default stipulation. Being aggrieved with this order the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 5. During the pendency of the present appeal a joint interlocutory application of compromise has been filed on behalf of the parties in which prayer has been made for recording the compromise. 6. The offence under section 307 of IPC, 1860 is not com-poundable one, therefore, compromise cannot be recorded, but at the some time, it is well settled that while awarding sentence, the fact of compromise can be taken into consideration. It has been stated that the appellant has remained in custody for a period of about 11 months and according to the medical opinion, the injuries caused to the complainant/injured have been found to be simple in nature. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that ends of justice will be met in case if the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellant by the trial Court be reduced to the period of one year. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part by affirming the conviction of offence under section 307 of IPC, 1860 and the sentence of imprisonment against the appellant is reduced to the period of one year. 8. The appellant is in jail, the Registry of this Court is directed to arrange for issuance of supersession warrant against appellant-Pramod Singh. A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court along with record for information and compliance. 9. With the aforesaid modification the criminal appeal stands partly allowed and disposed of.