Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with SI Ankit v. MANI RAM MANISH ANR

Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with SI Ankit versus MANI RAM @ MANISH & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sarthak Karol, Ms. Neelakshi Bhadauria, Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Ms. Tanishka Pawar and Mr. Shashank, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. By way of the present appeal filed under Section 377 Cr.P.C., the appellant/State seeks modification of the order on sentence dated 08.06.2022 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in SC No. 552/19 arising out of FIR No. 780/2016 registered under Sections 323/308/452/34 IPC at P.S. Neb Sarai. The respondents were convicted under Sections 324/452/34 IPC by judgment of conviction dated 23.05.2022, for unlawfully entering the complainant’s property with the intent to commit an offence and causing simple injuries to the complainant and his wife. Vide the impugned order on sentence dated 08.06.2022, the respondents were directed to be released on Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:30.08.2025 13:16:34 CRL.A. 690/2023 probation of good conduct for a period of one year after furnishing personal bonds of Rs. 15,000 each, with one surety of like amount. Further, they were ordered to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- each, out of which Rs.15,000/- was to be paid to the complainant as compensation and Rs.10,000/- was to be deposited with the Court. In default of payment, the respondents were to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days.

2. Briefly stated, the facts as borne out from the record are that on

20.10.2016, after a quarrel over settlement of shop accounts between the complainant and respondent no. 1/Mani Ram @ Manish, the latter, along with respondent no. 2/Amar Nath @ Guddu, and two other associates, entered the complainant’s house armed with an iron rod and dandas and proceeded to assault him. He was struck on the head with the iron rod, resulting in bleeding injuries. When his wife attempted to intervene, she too was assaulted with dandas and suffered injuries. Both injured were taken to AIIMS Trauma Centre, where they were medically examined, and the injuries were opined to be simple in nature.

3. While the respondents were convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 324/452/34 IPC for causing simple injuries, they were acquitted under Section 308 IPC against the charge of attempted culpable homicide. The Trial Court, after analysing the evidence of the injured witnesses and the medical records, held that the offence under Section 308 IPC was not made out, as though a rod and dandas were used, there were no repeated blows, the injuries were opined to be simple, and the force employed was not of such nature as to infer intention or knowledge to cause culpable homicide.

4. In the present appeal, the appellant/State contends that the sentence as Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:30.08.2025 13:16:34 CRL.A. 690/2023 awarded is grossly inadequate and does not reflect the gravity of the offence. To this end, the learned APP for the State submits that undue leniency was shown by the Trial Court in directing release on probation, and that a more stringent penalty is warranted to serve the ends of justice and public interest.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, supports the order on sentence and submits that the Trial Court has already considered all relevant factors, including the nature of injuries, the relationship between the parties, and the absence of prior criminal antecedents. It is contended that the respondents have faced trial since the year 2016 and have complied with the conditions imposed upon them by the Trial Court.

6. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. The conviction of the respondents under Sections 324/452/34 IPC is not in dispute in the present appeal. The limited question is with respect to the adequacy of the sentence imposed.

7. Concededly, the respondents had no prior criminal antecedents and were first-time offenders. Respondent no. 1/Mani Ram @ Manish was stated to be married with children, while respondent no. 2/Amar Nath @ Guddu was supporting his aged parents. Both were peaceful citizens with deep roots in society. The Probation Officer’s report, called for by the Trial Court, opined that they were suitable for being released on probation.

8. The occurrence itself arose out of a quarrel between brothers over settlement of accounts, and the injuries suffered by the complainant and his wife were opined to be simple. Noting that the respondents stood convicted under Sections 324/452/34 IPC, and further that none of them had been previously involved in any offence, the Trial Court considered it appropriate to extend to them the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:30.08.2025 13:16:34 CRL.A. 690/2023 of Offenders Act, 1958. The respondents were also saddled with the liability of depositing a fine of Rs. 25,000/- each, out of which Rs.15,000/- was earmarked as compensation to the complainant.

9. Sentencing is not to be approached mechanically, but by balancing the nature of the offence with the prospects of reform. In cases such as the present, where the convicts are first-time offenders convicted for causing simple injuries in a family dispute, the grant of probation coupled with a significant fine directed substantially towards compensation cannot be said to be grossly inadequate. Nothing has been brought to the notice of this Court to suggest that the respondents failed to comply with the terms of probation or were involved in any other case. 10 In view thereof, I find no infirmity in the impugned order on sentence and no ground to entertain the present appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed alongwith the pending application.

11. A copy of this judgment be communicated to the Trial Court. AUGUST 19, 2025 MANOJ KUMAR OHRI (JUDGE) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:30.08.2025 13:16:34 CRL.A. 690/2023