IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI &

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA th ON THE 7 OF NOVEMBER, 2024 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2269 of 2011 AMIT @ RAJU Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Sandesh Dixit - Advocate for the appellant.

Ms. Shweta Yadav - Deputy Advocate General for the State.

JUDGMENT Per: Justice Smt. Anuradha Shukla Challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in Sessions Trial No.278/2011 on 30.8.2011, this appeal has been preferred. Under the impugned judgment, appellant along with another person named Shakir, son of Gulfam, was convicted of the offence of Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC and was sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- with a default clause to undergo additional imprisonment of three months in case of non-payment of fine.

2. It is relevant to mention here that the other convict Shakir, son of Gulfam, had preferred a separate criminal appeal as Criminal Appeal No.2482/2011 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.12.2022.

3. Brief facts relevant for the decision of this case are that complainant Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT Rajesh Chouksey and appellant Amit alias Raju along with co-convict Shakir were suffering the life imprisonment in Central Jail, Jabalpur; on the date of incident i.e. 6.12.2020 at around 5:00 p.m. complainant Rajesh Chouksey was walking towards Badi Gole when appellant and his companion Shakir attacked him; appellant was having a sharp-edged spoon while Shakir was holding a knife made of an iron strip; they inflicted several injuries on complainant Rajesh Chouksey, which were life threatening in nature; Jail Prahari (Sentinel) Deepak Pathak intervened and informed the Pradhan Prahari (Head Sentinel) Nanhelal; Rajesh was taken to jail hospital where Dr. Sherly Jacob examined him and prepared the MLC report; he was then referred to Medical College, Jabalpur, in the light of grievous injuries; Dr. Mohd. Iqbal examined him; he was admitted in the Medical College and given treatment; a report was made to the police upon which crime was registered; both the weapons were seized and rest of the investigation was undertaken; upon its conclusion, the charge-sheet was filed and the trial was held. Finally, the trial culminated into conviction of both appellant and co- convict Shakir by awarding similar sentence to both of them as has been detailed earlier.

4. The grounds mentioned in the appeal-memo are numerous. Under them, both conviction and sentence have been challenged claiming that the error in law and on facts was committed by the trial court in holding the appellant guilty and sentencing him but during the course of final arguments, learned counsel for appellant simply placed emphasis on the question of sentence. It has been argued that there was no medical evidence to show that the injury Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT caused to victim was life threatening, moreover this injury was allegedly caused by a spoon which was not a deadly weapon and the victim sustained injuries for having fallen on a rough surface during a scuffle. It has, therefore, been argued that imposing life sentence was not proportionate to the gravity of alleged crime. Moreso, it was also argued that the appellant is in custody since 29.12.2010 and this period is now aggregating to almost 14 years excluding the period of remission. It was, therefore, prayed that the appeal should be allowed.

5. State has resisted the appeal, claiming that no interference is warranted either in the finding of conviction or on the quantum of sentence for the simple reason that the appellant was already undergoing sentence of life imprisonment when he committed this crime of attempt to murder causing grievous injury to the victim. Therefore, a request has been made to dismiss the appeal.

6. Both the parties have been heard and the record has been perused