Dilip Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 212 Chatt

                                                                                 NAFR

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                          Criminal Appeal No. 1508 of 2015

   • Dilip Sahu, S/o Late Ramu Sahu, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Amadi, P.S.
       Arjuni, At Present Near Bailbazar, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                          ---- Appellant

                                          Versus

   • State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari,
       District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                      ---- Respondent

       For Appellant              :       None.
       For State/Respondent       :       Shri Ghanshyam Patel, G.A.




                 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel
                                Judgment on Board

09/06/2021

1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated

26/11/2015 passed in S.T. No.15/2015 by the Additional Sessions

Judge, Dhamtari, District - Dhamtari, (C.G.) wherein appellant has

been convicted and sentenced as under :

                     Conviction                              Sentence

                U/s 324 of the I.P.C.          R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs.100/-
                                                       with default stipulation

               U/s 326 of the I.P.C.           R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.100/-
                                                      with default stipulations
                        Both sentences to run concurrently.

2. According to the case of the prosecution, on 18.05.2015, there was a

Chhatti Program at the house of nephew of the complainant/injured

namely Gopal Sonkar (PW-1), wherein the accused/appellant was

given tender of cooking food stuffs. At about 10:30 PM, when relatives

of the complainant and others were taking meal, appellant in the state

of intoxication came to the spot and started abusing. Thereafter, he

assaulted the complainant at his abdomen with the help of knife. When

Narendra Sonkar came on spot and attempted to stop the appellant,

then he also assaulted him by knife on his abdomen due to which he

also sustained injuries. Both injured persons were taken to the hospital

for treatment. Report was made by complainant Gopal Sonkar vide

Ex.P-1. Statement of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of

Cr.P.C. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed.

Trial Court framed charges under Sections 307/34 (two counts), 294 &

506-Part II/34 of the I.P.C against appellant and co-accused person

namely Chunesh Kumar Sahu. To prove the guilt of the

accused/appellant, prosecution has examined as many as 10

witnesses. No defence witness has been examined. Statement of

appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein

accused/appellant has pleaded his innocence and false implication in

the matter.

3. After completion of trial, the trial Court acquitted the co-accused

person namely Chunesh Kumar Sahu from all charges, however,

convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph 1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

4. Vide PUD dated 04/03/2021, sent by the Jail Superintendent, Central

Jail, Raipur, (C.G.) would mention that appellant has undergone the

entire jail sentence imposed upon him by the trial Court and already

released on 28/7/2018.

5. No one appears on behalf of appellant today. Finding the correctness

of judgment of the trial Court, I decide this appeal on merits.

6. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the State supports the

impugned judgment and submits that sentence awarded by the trial

Court is just and proper and requires no interference.

7. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the State, perused the

record and statements of the witnesses minutely.

8. Gopal Sonkar (PW-1) in his Court Statement has supported the entire

case of the prosecution and deposed according to the case of the

prosecution. Narendra Sonkar (PW-2), Dilip Sahu (PW-4), Devesh

Sonkar (PW-5) and Banti Sonkar (PW-6) have also supported the

statement of Gopal Sonkar (PW-1). From the statement of Dr. T.R.

Dhruw (PW-3) and M.L.C. reports of the injured persons, it is well

established that both have sustained injuries in their abdomen which

was caused by sharp edge object. The injuries sustained by the

Narendra Sonkar was of grievous nature.

9. On a minute examination of the evidence on record, it is clear that

there is sufficient evidence against the present appellant to hold him

guilty. In my considered view, the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant.

10. Consequently, the appeal has no merit and is, therefore, dismissed.

11. Records of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this

order forthwith for information and necessary compliance.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash