1 - Sagar Goswami Alias Hemant Goswami S/o Triloki Goswami Aged About 21 Years v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.21 16:13:27 +0530 2025:CGHC:34217 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 594 of 2025 1 - Sagar Goswami Alias Hemant Goswami S/o Triloki Goswami Aged About 21 Years R/o Khandwa Bhatapara Thana Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sudarshan Giri Goswami Alias Sudas S/o Late Birju Giri Goswami Aged About 74 Years R/o Village Khandwa Bhatapara, Thana Rakhi District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Appellants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) CRA No. 920 of 2024 Sumitra Goswami W/o Triloki Goswami, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Khandwa, Bhatapara, P.S. - Rakhi, District- Raipur (C.G.) ---Appellant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.-Rakhi, District- Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) 2 For Appellants :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate & Ms. Shristi Upadhyay, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 18/07/2025 1 Since both the appeals have arisen out of the same impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence,
Decision
they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2 Both the appeals have been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.03.2024 passed by learned 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.134/2023 whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under : Conviction Sentence U/s 447 of IPC R.I. for 3 months U/s 307/34 of IPC R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 3 months. 3 The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.04.2023, the appellants herein along with the juvenile in conflict with law trespassed the house of complainant Johat Ram Sahu and in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted his grandson Ajay Sahu with knife causing grievous injuries to him. On report being lodged in this regard by the grandfather of the injured, FIR was registered and after completion of investigation charge sheet was filed 3 against the appellants. 4 So as to hold the appellants guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited 30 documents in support of its case. The statements of the appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. 5 After appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, vide impugned judgment, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offence as mentioned in para-2 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeals. 6 Learned counsel for the appellants submit that they are not pressing the appeals so far as the conviction part of the impugned judgment is concerned and would confine their argument to the sentence part thereof only. They submit that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellants is 7 years, out of which the appellants have already served the jail sentence of about 1 year & 11 months. They pray that the sentence imposed upon the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them and they may be released from jail. 7 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for appellants. 8 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4 9 Dr. Vishnu Gupta (PW-5) who conducted medical examination of injured Ajay Sahu has stated that there was a deep wound of 2 x 1 cm in the upper part of his right chest, which had penetrated deep into the chest. The injured was having difficulty breathing because the left lung was filled with blood, but he was in a position to give statement. The injury sustained by the injured was grievous in nature and there was a possibility of his death if he did not receive timely treatment. The doctor has expressed the possibility of the said injury being caused by the knife seized in the case and his report is Ex.P-4. Dr. Ramnarayan (PW-10) has stated that he had taken chest X-ray of injured Ajay Sahu and the report is Ex.P-13, according to which, the left lung was filled with blood or water and his heart shifted to the right side due to water. He has stated that there was no fracture in the rib bone and as per his report, there was no serious injury. 10 Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of injured Ajay Sahu (PW-3), his grandfather Johat Ram Sahu (PW-1), sister-in-law Damini Sahu (PW-2), mother Roshni Sahu (PW-4), witness Gourav Verma (PW-9), Dr. Vishnu Gupta (PW-5) and Radiologist Dr. Ramnarayan Verma and their reports, the involvement of the appellants in the crime in question is clearly established. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 447 & 307/34 of IPC. 11 As regards sentence, in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1977) 3 SCC 287, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that if you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure 5 him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries and held in para-9 as follows: “9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 : "The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it’. George Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by re- culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive times. The human today views sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : “If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal Courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.” 12 In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellants is 7 years, out of which they have already 6 served the jail sentence of about 1 year 11 months, there is no previous criminal records of the appellants and also considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the appellants are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. 13 Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants under Section 307/34 of IPC is maintained but their jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by them i.e. 1 year 11 months. However, the fine imposed upon the appellants by the Trial Court under section 307/34 of IPC is enhanced from Rs.500 to Rs.5,000, which shall be paid to the injured Ajay Sahu. In default of payment of fine, the appellants shall undergo RI for 5 months. The fine amount already deposited by the appellants shall be adjusted. However, the conviction and sentence of the appellants for the offence under Section 447 of IPC is maintained. 14 Consequently, both the appeals stand allowed in part to the extent indicated herein-above. 15 The appellants are reported to be in jail. They be released forthwith if not required to be detained in default of fine and not required in any other case. 16 Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. A copy of the judgment may also be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent wherein the appellants are suffering the jail sentence. Khatai Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE