P.S. Civil Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its District Magistrate, District Bilaspur Chhattis
Case Details
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 867 of 2016 Digitally signed by ANJANI KUMAR ALLENA Date: 2025.03.06 17:15:15 +0530 1 - Monu Singh Thakur S/o Raghunath Singh Thakur Aged About 30 Years 2 - Lalla Singh @ Dharmendra Singh Thakur S/o Raghunath Singh Thakur Aged About 21 Years 3 - Rakesh Singh @ Chhotu Singh S/o Raghunath Singh Thakur Aged About 19 Years 4 - Vikku @ Gaurav Singh Thakur S/o Ajay Singh Thakur Aged About 22 Years All R/o Kududand, Mitti Teela Mohalla, P.S. Civil Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its District Magistrate, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicants
Legal Reasoning
: Shri Achyut Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State : Smt. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 05/03/2025 Heard. 1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.09.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur C.G. in Criminal Appeal No.158/2015 & 159/2015, whereby the learned appellate Court has dismissed both the appeals filed by the applicants herein, while affirming the judgment 18.09.2015 passed by the Court of J.M.F.C., Bilaspur in Criminal Case No.670/2012 convicting the 2 applicants under Sections 323/34 (on two counts) and 325/34 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.1000/- each on two counts and in default thereof, to undergo additional RI for one month each under Section 323/34 IPC (on two counts) and to undergo RI for 2 years with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof, to undergo additional RI for one month each under Section 325/34 of IPC, Both the learned Courts, however, acquitted them of the charges under Sections 294 and 506 Part-II of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 10.08.2012, complainant - Basant Kumar Kashyap (P.W.1) lodged a report at Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur stating therein that P.W.3 Chandan Kashyap came to him and told about his dispute with applicant No.4 Vikku Thakur and in the meanwhile the said applicant came over there along with the other applicants armed with rod and lathi and started abusing the complainant (P.W.1), Ashok Kashyap (P.W.2) and Chandan Kashyap (P.W.3) and also assaulted them with rod and lathi, due to which, the complainant party received injuries. On the basis of report, F.I.R. was lodged vide Ex.P.1. During investigation, vide Ex.P.2 map was prepared and the applicants were taken into custody. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur. The applicants abjured the charges and pleaded non-guilty. 4. The learned Court of JMFC and the appellate Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted and sentenced the applicants as mentioned in Para 1 of this order. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this revision on conviction part of the applicants but confines his 3 argument to the sentence part only, which according to him, is on higher side. He further submits that the applicants remained in jail for 20 days, i.e., from 12.09.2012 to 20.09.2012 and then from 06.09.2016 to 16.09.2016, there are no criminal antecedents against them and they are facing the lis since September, 2012, i.e. for more than 12 years. He also submits that fine amount of Rs.12,000/- imposed upon them has been deposited before the trial Court, therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the applicants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the revision and supported the impugned judgment. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 8. Considering the statements of PW-1 Basant Kashyap, P.W.2 Ashok Kashyap, P.W.3 Chandan Kashyap and that of medical evidence of P.W.7 Dr. R. Jitpure (Radiologist) and P.W.11 P,K. Mitra and the other evidence and material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court as well as the Appellate Court being based on the evidence available on record is a correct finding and I hereby affirm the said finding of conviction of applicants. 9. As regards the sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the applicants have undergone 20 days jail sentence, they are facing the lis since September, 2012 i.e. for more than 12 years, there are no criminal antecedents against them, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the 4 applicants, the jail sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, sentence of fine amount of Rs.1000/- awarded under Section 325/34 IPC is enhanced to Rs.3,000/- each while keeping in tact the fine amount of Rs.1000/- imposed under Section 323/34 IPC (on two counts). Since the fine amount of Rs.12,000/- awarded under the said Sections has already been deposited, therefore, the remaining fine amount of Rs.8,000/-, enhanced by this Court, shall be deposited before the trial Court as early as possible. Out of the total fine amount of Rs.20,000/-, a sum of Rs.10,000/- shall be paid to P.W.1 Basant Kashyap and Rs.4,000/- each shall be paid to other victims, i.e., P.W.2 Ashok Kashyap and P.W.3 Chandan Kashyap. It is made clear that the default sentence and the direction to run sentences concurrently shall remain in tact. 10. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed. While maintaining conviction of the applicants under Section 323/34, 323/34 and 325/34 of IPC, the sentence imposed thereunder by the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court is hereby modified and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. 11. It is reported that the applicants are on bail. Their bail bonds are not discharged at this stage and the same shall remain operative for a further period of six months in light of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani