BASTIRAM SON OF DHEMU RESIDENT OF HIWARKHEDI, TAHSIL & DISTRICT BETUL (M.P.) Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION, BETUL (M.P.)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.08.1997 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Betul in S.T. No. 96/1996 convicting the appellant under Section 325 of IPC and thereby sentencing him to suffer RI of one year, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The facts in detail are already narrated in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment and for convenience they are not being reproduced here. Suffice it to say that appellant was charged under Section 333 IPC, however, he has been convicted under Section 325 IPC and has been directed to suffer RI of one year.

(2.) THE contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that looking to the evidence placed on record, it is not proved that appellant has committed any offence. Alternative submission has also been put forth by him that if this Court comes to the conclusion that appellant has committed the offence, since the incident occurred 16 years ago, it would not be fruitful to send the appellant behind the bars again. It is also contended by him that appellant has already suffered jail sentence of 8 days and this would be the appropriate punishment for the offence which he has committed.

(3.) HAVING learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this appeal deserves to be allowed in part.