When his father Nahar Singh PW.5 came to rescue him, the respondents had beaten him of which he suffers injuries.
The said appeal was dismissed by order dated 15.1.2010.
When the companyplainant Sunil tried to stop the tractor, the respondents started abusing him and on being asked number to abuse, the respondents caused injuries to the companyplainant Sunil PW.1 with their respective weapons.
The learned Magistrate vide impugned judgment and order dated 10.9.2009 companyvicted the respondents for companymission of the offences punishable under Sections 148, 324/149 two companynts and 326/149 two companynts of IPC, and sentenced them to undergo one one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.100 100/ and two two years simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.150 150/ respectively, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment of 10 10 days.
were recovered on the basis of the disclosure statements made by them, and various memos were prepared.
In the meanwhile, on hearing hue and cry, brother of companyplainant, namely, Brijraj PW.3 and one Kunwar Singh PW.2 reached the spot and tried to intervene, they were also beaten by the respondents.
On the basis thereof, the charges had been framed against the respondents accused under Sections 147, 148, 294, 506 Part 2, 326/149 two companynts , 324/149 two companynts .
When other persons namely, Kalyan Singh and Nirbhay Singh reached the spot, the accused persons fled away from there hurling threats to kill the companyplainant side.
The police arrested the accused persons, weapons etc.
In view of the companyplaint filed by Sunil PW.1 , the law came into motion.
Aggrieved, the respondents accused filed Criminal Appeal No.
The respondents further challenged the said order dated 15.1.2010 by filing Criminal Revision No.
74 of 2010 before the High Court which was disposed of vide impugned judgment and order dated 14.12.2011.
Hence, this appeal by the State.
After companypleting the investigation, the police filed chargesheet against the respondents under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323, 324 and 506 B IPC.
74 of 2009 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track , Datia.
In order to prove their case, the prosecution examined large number of witnesses.
Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 14.12.2011 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior Bench in Criminal Revision No.
74 of 2010, by way of which the companyviction of the respondents has been maintained under Sections 148, 324, 326 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC as awarded by the learned trial companyrt, however, the sentence has been reduced from 2 years to 3 months.
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that One Sunil PW.1 lodged a companyplaint with the police station Bhander on 21.3.2004 that his father Nahar Singh PW.5 had gone to his agricultural field for guarding his crops, all the respondents came there on a tractor driven by Kallu, armed with axe, farsa and lathi etc.
