High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 01 MP CK 0124

Shakeel Khan @ Pappu & another vs The State of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 20 January 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Kumar Shukla
RESULT
Disposed off
CASE NUMBER
96 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 372 words
1.

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the order of conviction and sentence dated 06.12.2008 passed by the 8th

Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No. 331/2008 (State of M.P. Vs Shakeel Khan @ Papu & another) whereby the appellants

have been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 489-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and

fine of Rs.1000/- each. In default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment of six months.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submitted that the appellant no.1 Shakeel Khan @ Pappu was not granted bail by this Court.

The incident had taken place on 20.03.2008. It is further submitted by him that the appellant no.1 has already undergone the sentence. It is further

submitted by him that the appellant no.2 Shahnaz Khan @ Shanno is lady and she has also undergone the substantial sentence of two years and 8

months before grant of the bail by this Court. It is also submitted by him that the incident had taken place in the year, 2008 and the appellants have

remained in jail for a substantial period. It is also submitted him that there is no minimum sentence prescribed for the offences under Section 489-B

of the IPC.

3.

These facts are not disputed by learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

4.

Taking into consideration that the incident had taken place in the year, 2008 and the appellants have undergone the substantial sentence out of

the sentence awarded by the trial Court. This Court is of the view that now no useful purpose would be served sending them in jail after a period of

more than 7-1/2 years. The appellant no.2 is a lady and she had also undergone the substantial sentence.

5.

In the interest of justice, this Court interferes with the sentence and reduce the same to the period already undergone by the appellants.

6.

Accordingly conviction of appellants no. 1 & 2 is maintained and the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by them. The fine

amount if not deposited, shall be deposited by the appellant.

7.

With the aforesaid modifications in the sentence, the appeal is disposed of.