Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1016 of 2004 1 - Nand Lal (Abated) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 27-01-2025 And 27-02-2025. 2 - Sant Lal S/o Ronha Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Karaunti, P.S. Bhaiyathan, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. 3 - Rudra Prasad S/o Nand Lal Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Karaunti, P.S. Bhaiyathan, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. 4 - Inzor Sai S/o Bal Govind Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Kasera, P.S. Bhaiyathan, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. versus ... Appellants 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Aarkshi Kendra, Thana Jhilmili, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellants
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate For State / : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. GA Respondent(s) Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board 24/03/2025 This appeal under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short CrPC) has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.10.2004 passed by the 2nd Additional 2 Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur, CG in Sessions Trial No. 360/03. By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as mentioned below: Conviction Sentence Appellant No. 2 under Section 324 IPC RI of one year Appellant Nos. 3 & 4 under Section 323 RI of 6 months to both IPC 2. There was a land related dispute between the complainant Pyarelal and the accused/appellants herein. On 20.06.2003 in the morning when the complainant (PW- 1) was coming back from the locality with the oxen, he saw accused/appellants Nand Lal and Inzore assaulting his father Ram Avtar who was working in the field with rod and club, as a result of which he suffered injuries on his head, right chest and right leg. When the complainant reached the field, accused/appellant - Rudra Prasad caught hold of him, accused Sant Lal aimed to cause axe injury on his head but the blow fell on his shoulder. Accused/appellant Rudra Prasad inflicted injury on right side of his head with iron rod. As he held the axe from them, the accused/appellants run away. Accused Sant Lal while fleeing threatened him and his father of being done away with. This incident its stated to have been seen by Magal Sai, Sunder Sai, Ramdhari, Bhola and etc. Thereafter, on the report (Ex.P-1) lodged by the complainant, offence under Sections 341, 294, 506 -B, 323, 324, 325 r/w 34 IPC were registered against the accused/appellants. After medical examination and completion of investigation related formalities, charge-sheet was filed against the accused/appellants under the same sections. However, the charge was framed against accused Inzor Sai and Nand Lal under Sections 341, 294, 506 -B, 323, 325 and in the alternative 325/34 IPC was framed whereas against accused/appellant Rudra Prasad and Sant Lal the charge under Sections 341, 294, 506-b, 323/34 and in the alternative 3 324/34 IPC was framed. The accused/appellants however, denied the charges. 3. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants under Section 313 CrPC were also recorded where they pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case and claimed trial. 4. After hearing the parties, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned above. Hence this appeal. 5. Is it relevant to mention here that during the pendency of this appeal accused Nand Lal passed away and the appeal as regards him stood abated on 27.01.2025. This appeal now is in respect of the four surviving accused/appellants only. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused/appellants beyond all reasonable doubts. He submits that the allegations of assault was against accused Nand Lal who passed away during the pendency of this appeal and as regards the other accused/appellants no reliable evidence is there. He submits that the complainant party had also indulged in beating the accused person herein and at their instance a complaint was made against his also and therefore, as a counter blast this case has been foisted on them. He submits that if this Court is not convinced on merits of the case, looking to the fact that the accused/appellants remained on bail during the trial as also during the pendency of this appeal; that the appellants and the complainant party are resident of the same village, that no enmity between them remains as of now, that no criminal antecedent is there against the accused/appellants, that all the accused persons at the time of incident were in the age group of 20 to 35 who by now must have reached an advance age, and looking to the period for which they remained in jail, either the sentence imposed on them may be reduced already period undergone or they may be extended the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offender Act. 7. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/State supports the judgment 4 impugned to be in accordance with law and the evidence led by the parties, and being so no interference in this appeal is required. He further tries to strengthen his case by arguing that the complainant had suffered fracture and his testimony gets corroboration from the medical evidence, the conviction of the accused/appellants cannot be interfered with. Even the sentence imposed on the appellants is argued to be quite adequate and needs no reduction. 8. 9. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. Praye Lal (PW-1) has stated that on 20.06.2003 in the morning when he was coming back from the locality with the oxen, he saw accused/appellants Nand Lal and Inzore assaulting his father Ram Avtar (PW-2) who was working in the field. Accused Nand Lal assaulted PW-2 with rod and Inzor Sai with club. As a result of this PW-2 suffered injuries on his head, right chest and right leg. When this witness reached the field, accused/appellant - Rudra Prasad caught hold of him, accused Sant Lal aimed to cause axe injury on his head but the blow fell on his shoulder. Accused/appellant Rudra Prasad inflicted injury on right side of his head with iron rod. As he held the axe from them, the accused/appellants run away. Accused Sant Lal while fleeing threatened him and his father of being done away with. This incident its stated to have been seen by Magal Sai, Sunder Sai, Ramdhari, Bhola and etc. Thereafter, report was lodged and PW-2 was medically examined. The axe snatched from the accused/appellants was seized under Ex. P-2. This witness has stated that he had seen the occurrence. The testimony of this witness has been supported by injured Ram Avtar (PW-2). He has also stated that accused Nand Lal assaulted him with rod and accused Inzor Sai with club on his head as a result of which he became unconscious. He remained hospitalized for 14-15 days. The evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 is corroborated by Dr. Dharmendra Kumar Parashar (PW-10) who medically examined injured Pyare Lal (PW-1) and gave his report Ex. P-12 opining as many as four injuries and all were simple in nature. According to him 5 injury no. 1 on the back side of the head, injury no. 3 on the right leg and the injury no. 4 on the left knee were caused by hard and blunt object whereas injury no. 2 on right shoulder was caused by hard and sharp edged weapon. This witness also examined Ram Avtar (PW-2) and gave his report Ex. P-13 stating to have found four injuries out of which injury no. 1 on the left partial region and injury no. 2 on right leg were simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt object. As regards injury no. 3 on back and injury no. 4 on the right leg which were also caused by hard and blunt object, the injured was referred to District Hospital Ambikapur for radiological examination. The injuries caused to PW-1 and PW-2 could have been caused the club. Dr. M. K. Jain (PW-11) is the witness who radiologically examined PW-2 and gave his report Ex. P-15 has stated that after seeing X-ray, he found compound fracture on the right tibia and fibula bone whereas there was no fracture on the chest bone. 10. From the aforesaid discussion made in the light of evidence of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-10, the findings recorded by the Court below as regards conviction part of the judgment impugned is concerned, they being fully based on the evidence collected by the prosecution, do not appear to suffer from any illegality or infirmity. The statement made by PW-1 and PW-2 gets full corroboration from the medical evidence. Accordingly, the conviction of accused/appellant No. 2 under Sections 324 and that of accused/appellant Nos. 3 & 4 under Section 323 IPC is hereby maintained. 11. As regards sentence, looking to the fact that the accused/appellants remained on bail during the trial as also during the pendency of this appeal; that the appellants and the complainant party are resident of the same village; that no enmity between them remains as of now; that no criminal antecedent is brought to the notice of this Court against the accused/appellants; that all the accused persons at the time of incident were in the age group of 20 to 35 who by now must have reached an advanced age, they remained in jail for 9 days, this Court is of the consider opinion 6 that no useful purpose would be served in further making them remain in jail and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence imposed on them is reduced to the
Decision
period undergone. Order accordingly. 12. Copy of this judgment and record be sent back. The appellants are on bail, their bail bond will remain in operation for a period of six months in view of Section 481 of BNSS, 2023 13. Appeal thus allowed in part. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan