SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(MP) 978

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT INDORE BENCH
N.K.Mody, J.
Shobharam S-o.Laluji Moghiya & 3 Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. - Respondent
Cr. A. No. 1306-2005
Decided On : 06-04-2010

The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to allow the taking of additional evidence in an appeal under Section 391 Cr.P.C., particularly in cases where the appellants have sustained injuries and a related criminal case is involved.

Headnote:

Section 391 Cr.P.C. - Appeal - AIR 2001 SC 2120 - The court allowed the appellants to adduce evidence in defense and remanded the case back to the Sessions Court, considering the injuries sustained by the appellants and the final outcome of a related criminal case.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted for offenses under Section 452 IPC, Section 307/34 IPC, and Section 323/34 IPC after a quarrel with the complainant party. They appealed, arguing that the evidence was not properly appreciated and that they were not given the opportunity to adduce defense evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellants sustained injuries in the incident and that a related criminal case was registered against the complainant party. It allowed the appellants to adduce evidence in defense and remanded the case back to the Sessions Court.

Issues: The issues included the proper appreciation of evidence, consideration of material omissions and contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses, and the opportunity to adduce defense evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of Section 391 Cr.P.C., which allows for the taking of additional evidence in an appeal. The court considered the injuries sustained by the appellants and the final outcome of a related criminal case in reaching its decision.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appellants to adduce evidence in defense and remanded the case back to the Sessions Court, considering the injuries sustained by the appellants and the final outcome of a related criminal case.

ORDER

N.K Mody, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.11.2005 passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhar in S.T. No. 252/2004, whereby appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC for a period of one year RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, under Section 307/ 34 IPC for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 500/- and under Section 323/ 34 for a period of six months RI each, present appeal has been filed.

2. In short case of the prosecution was that on 15.5.2004 at about 8 PM there was a quarrel between the appellants and the complainant party and they assaulted each other with deadly weapons. Upon this a complaint was registered and after investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellants and after framing of charges and also recording of the evidence appellants were convicted as stated above, against which the present appeal has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants argued at length and submits that appellants have convicted illegally while appellants have not committed any offence. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Court below committed error in not properly appreciating the evidence, which resulted incorrect judgment and is liable to be set aside in this appeal. It is submitted that the learned Court below committed error in not considering that material omissions and contradictions appearing in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. It is submitted that appeal be allowed and impugned judgment passed by the learned Court below be set aside.

4. In alternate learned counsel for appellants submits that appellants were in jail w.e.f. 7.8.2004 to 5.9.2004 during, trial and after conviction the jail sentence was suspended by the learned trial Court, which was confirmed by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2005. It is submitted that I.A. No. 5208/ 2009 is filed by the appellants under Section 391 Cr. P.C., wherein it is alleged that in the said incident appellants also sustained injuries. It is submitted that upon the complaint of the appellants case was registered at Crime No. 219/04 against the complainant party of this case. It is submitted that injury report was also submitted before the learned Court below. Various documents, which are Ex. D/1 to D/10 were exhibited but the injury report could not be exhibited. Learned counsel submits that vide order dated 29.8.93 passed by the S.D.M., Badnawar in Cri. Case No. 288/B-121/91-92 appellant No. 1 Shobharam was appointed as Pujari to perform the prayer in the temple of Ramdev. It is submitted that since the injury report has not been taken into consideration, which was already on record, therefore, the application be allowed and the appellants be permitted to adduce the evidence in defence and the case be remanded.

5. Learned counsel for the State submits that after due appreciation of evidence learned Court below has found the appellants guilty for the aforesaid offence. Hence no interference is called for in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court. So far as IA is concerned, learned counsel submits that since the documents relating to the injuries sustained by the appellants were in existence at the relevant time and were not exhibited by the appellants, therefore at this stage appellants could not be permitted to fill up the lacuna. It is submitted that appeal be dismissed.

6. Section 391 Cr.P.C. reads as under: -

391. Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken - (1) In dealing with any appeal under this Chapter, the Appellate Court, if it thinks additional evidence to be necessary, shall record its reasons and may either take such evidence itself, or direct it to be taken by a Magistrate, or when, the Appellate Court is a High Court, by a Court of Session or a Magistrate.

(2) When the additional evidence is taken by the Court of Session the Magistrate, it or he shall certify such evidence to the Appellate Court, and such Court shall thereupon proceed to dispose of the appeal.

(3) T






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top