Ramakant Vishwakarma @ Nichchi Panda vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided on: 08-04-2026

<div> NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28223 1 CRA-3008-2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI th ON THE 8 OF APRIL, 2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3008 of 2017 RAMAKANT VISHWAKARMA @ NICHCHI PANDA AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance: None for the appellant. Ms. Seema Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State. JUDGMENT Since nobody is appearing on behalf of the present appellants, therefore, Shri Vipin Jaiswal, Advocate is appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.07.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Teonthar District Rewa (M.P.) in Session Trial No.176/2015, whereby the present appellants (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused persons') have been convicted under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years each and fine of Rs.5,000/- each, with default stipulations. 2.The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Lalita Devi, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Sohagi on 26.07.2014 alleging that on 06.04.2014 the appellants/accused, under the pretext of performing a ritual to her daughter from an alleged evil spirit, forcibly placed the palm of Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 10-04-2026 17:30:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28223 2 CRA-3008-2017 her daughter into a burning havan kund, thereby causing severe burn injuries. It is further alleged that, due to subsequent infection, the victim’s palm had to be surgically amputated at the wrist during medical treatment, resulting in permanent disability. The complainant also alleged that the appellants threatened to kill her if she reported the incident to the police. 3. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed in the competent Court, which, on its turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions and from where it was received by the trial Court for trial. 4. The learned trial Judge on going through the evidence available in the charge sheet framed charges against the present appellants/accused persons for commission of offences punishable under Section, which they denied and requested for the trial. 5. The learned trial Judge after appreciating and marshalling the evidence available on record has found the appellants/accused persons guilty of the offence under Sections 506-II, 326/34, 190/34 of IPC and as such convicted and sentenced them as mentioned in paragraph-1 of this judgment. In this manner, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants. 6. At the outset, learned counsel appearing as amicus curiae for the appellants/accused has submitted that he does not wish to challenge the conviction of the present appellants for the aforesaid offences. He has submitted that the incident in question is of the year 2014. At the time of incident, Praveen is 25 years old while Ramakant is 38 years old at the time of commission of offence, which is related to year 2014. Since then around 12 years they are facing the trial. They are the first offender as per para 36 of Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 10-04-2026 17:30:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28223 3 CRA-3008-2017 the impugned judgment. Ramakant has served around 5 years of custody with remission and Praveen has suffered the custody of 01 year 08 months 03 days with remission. They remained cooperative during trial and also during pendency of this appeal. On the date of offence, no criminal antecedents was there. Having regard to the period of custody, absence of any criminal antecedents, prolonged pendency of the proceedings since 2014 spanning more than 12 years and their cooperative conduct, it is prayed that the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone while enhancing the fine amount suitably. 7.Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment but he has no objection on deciding the appeal on the point of sentence. 8.Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9.After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the record, it is found that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 326 of IPC for causing injuries to victim. Hence, the conviction of the present appellants needs no interference. 10. As regards sentence, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the age of the appellants being 38 and 25 years respectively at the time of the incident in the year 2014 and since then the appellants are facing agony of trial, the period of incarceration suffered by them i.e. Ramakant has served around 5 years of custody with remission and Praveen has suffered the custody of 01 year 08 months 03 days with remission, their cooperative conduct during trial coupled with the Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 10-04-2026 17:30:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28223 4 CRA-3008-2017 fact that they are the first offenders and the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the substantive jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by them, while suitably enhancing the fine amount. 11. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the appellants/accused persons under Section 326 of IPC, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the fine is enhanced under Section 326 of IPC from Rs.5,000/- each to Rs.8,000/- each. The enhanced fine amount shall be deposited by the appellants within a period of two months from today, failing which they shall undergo the sentence as originally awarded by the learned trial Court. The fine amount, if any already deposited by the appellants be adjusted against the aforesaid amount of fine. The entire amount of fine deposited by the appellants under the aforesaid Sections be paid to injured/victim as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C. 12.The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged. 13.The order of the learned trial Court pertaining to disposal of the property is hereby affirmed. 14.Let record of the learned trial Court along with copy of this order be sent back to the concerned trial Court for information and necessary compliance. 15.With the aforesaid, these appeals stand disposed of. 16. Shri Vipin Jaiswal, learned amicus curiae, is entitled to receive remuneration from the Madhya Pradesh High Court Legal Services Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 10-04-2026 17:30:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28223 5 CRA-3008-2017 Authority for the valuable assistance rendered to this Court in the adjudication of the present appeals. (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI) JUDGE RS Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 10-04-2026 17:30:11</div>