IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA st ON THE 1 OF MAY, 2023 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 240 of 2014 BETWEEN:-

1. LAL SINGH S/O PHOOLSINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILLAGE SATGAV P.S. MOHAN & DISTRICT SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. DEVISINGH S/O LAL SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT

30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILL- SATGAV, P.S.-MOHAN & DISTT-SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

....APPLICANTS (BY SHRI ANIRUDDHA SAXENA-ADVOCATE) .

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THRU. P.S. SHAJAPUR DISTRICT SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (bY SHRI TARUN PAGARE-G.A)

This revision coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This is revision u/S.397/401 of the Cr.P.C. arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.02.2014 passed by II ASJ, shajapur in Criminal Appeal No.132/2013 arising out of judgment dated 25.2.2013 passed by JMFC, Shajapur in criminal case No.1561/2011 whereby the appeal has been allowed in part and conviction under section 325/34 IPC was maintained however the sentence was reduced from 2 years to 3 months RI and fine amount is enhanced from Rs.200/- to Rs.1000/- each with default stipulation.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA

2. Counsel for applicants submits that the applicants have already undergone jail sentence of 22 days out of 3 months and the incident had taken place in the year 2012. The applicants were on bail during trial, appeal and revision and did not misuse the liberty. They maintained good record and relation with the complainant. No purpose would be served in sending the applicants in jail after such long period. Therefore, the applicants may be sentenced to the period already undergone and fine amount may be increased which may be directed to be paid to the complainant.

3. Counsel for State does not dispute the aforesaid facts.

4. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the short jail sentence of the applicants and the period already undergone by them, I am of the opinion that a case is made out for sentencing the applicants to the period already undergone with enhancement of fine amount. Further the incident had taken place in the year 2012 and the applicants have maintained good record and did not misuse the liberty. No purpose would be served in sending the applicants in jail after such long period.

5. Therefore, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction is maintained.

The jail sentence of the applicants is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the fine amount is enhanced from Rs1000/- to Rs.5,000/- each. The enhanced fine amount shall be paid to the complainant-Kailashbai. The bail bonds of the applicants shall be discharged after deposit of the fine amount. In case if the applicants fail to deposit the fine amount within the aforesaid period, the applicants shall undergo the remaining jail sentence as per the order of appellate court.

C.c as per rules.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)

JUDGE MK Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA