MALKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/accused has filed this revision under section 397/401 of the Cr.P.C, being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 28.09.2011 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sohagpur in Cr.A.No.125/11 whereby his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court under section 323 of the IPC for 1 year RI, has been affirmed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in short is that on 12.10.08 at about 7 O'clock in the evening, the complainant Mohan Singh, being agriculturist, was sitting in the shop of one Kanhiya Gujar, at the same time, the applicant came in front of such shop and called the complainant. On asking the complainant regarding reason for calling him, on which, the applicant demanded Rs.500/- from him for the expenses of liquor. The complainant denied to give the same, on which, by taking the stick lying in front of the shop, the applicant started his beating. On hearing the noise of quarrel, the witness Mukesh Patel and Arjun Patel came there to rescue him. Due to such beating, the complainant sustained injury on his head with bleeding. Subsequent to the incident, he went to the police station and lodged the report from where he was sent to the hospital. After his medical2 examination, his MLC report was prepared in which a lacerated wound measuring 3 X 1/2 with bleeding was found on his left forearm while in the right forearm, an abrasion was found. Besides this, an abrasion was also found at the center of the back side. After completion of the investigation, the applicant was chargesheeted for the offence of section 323,294,327 and 506 of the IPC. On evaluation of the charge-sheet,the charges of section 294,327 and 506-II of the IPC were framed and the trial was held. On appreciation of the evidence, he was acquitted from all the aforesaid charge but was held guilty under section 323 of the IPC and sentenced for RI one year. On filing the appeal, the same was dismissed. Thereafter, the applicant has come to this court with this revision.

(3.) The applicant's counsel without challenging the findings of the impugned judgment holding conviction against the applicant under the aforesaid sections made his limited submissions, firstly the applicant being first offender, did not have any criminal antecedents, be extended the benefit of the Probation of the Offenders Act and secondly and also in alternative, he prayed to reduce the jail sentence of the applicant up to the period for which he has suffered one day in the judicial custody during pendency of the trial and 14 days subsequent to the impugned judgment of the appellate court till passing the order of suspension of the jail sentence on 11.10.2011 by this court, by enhancing the amount of fine under the discretion of the court and prayed for allowing this revision till this extent.