Chattisgarh High Court
Sudhram @ Sudhuram vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 June, 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 362 of 2016
Sudhram @ Sudhuram S/o Jairam Majhwar, aged about 20 years, R/o
Village - Maaja, P.S. Lakhanpur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station: Lakhanpur, District -
Surguja Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Arvind Sinha, Advocate
For State/Respondent : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel
Judgment on Board
16.06.2021
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated
27.02.2016 passed in S.T. No. 97 of 2015 by the learned Sessions
Judge, Ambikapur, District: Surguja (Chhattisgarh) wherein, the
Appellant has been convicted as mentioned below:
Conviction Sentence In Default
U/s 304 (II) of RI for 07 years and fine In default of payment
IPC amount of Rs.500/-. of fine amount
additional RI for 01
month.
U/s 323 of IPC RI for 01 month.
Both the sentence are run concurrently
2. According to the case of prosecution, in the midnight between
12:00 to 01:00 A.M. a dispute took place between the Appellant
and Budhram. At that time, the Appellant beaten Budhram with the
help of wooden stick. The wife of Budhram namely Pramila came
there and tried to solve the matter but, the Appellant also assaulted
her. The Appellant also dashed wooden stick on the head of minor
child Bifalram due to which the child died. The matter was reported
by Pramila vide Exhibit-P/1. After completion of investigation,
charge-sheet was filed by the police. To robe the Appellant in the
crime-in-question prosecution examined as many as total 08
witnesses. In the statement of Appellant recorded under Section
313 of Cr.P.C, Appellant pleaded his innocence and false
implication in the matter, however no defence witness was
examined by the Appellant. After completion of trial, Trial Court
convicted and sentenced the Appellant as mentioned in Para 01 of
this judgment. Hence this appeal.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that he does
not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument
to the sentence part only. He further submits that the Appellant is
in jail since 21.05.2015 and has completed 06 years jail sentence
out of 07 years jail sentence imposed upon him by the concerned
Trial Court, he has no criminal antecedent and he is facing the lis
since 2015. Therefore, it is prayed by counsel that jail sentence
awarded to the Appellant may be reduced to the period already
undergone by him.
4. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the appeal and
supported the impugned judgment.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties
and perused the record minutely.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly considering that the Appellant has completed 06 years
jail sentence out of 07 years jail sentence imposed upon him by the
Trial Court, he is facing the lis since 2015 and there is no criminal
antecedent against him, I am of the view that the ends of justice
would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the
Appellant, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the
period already undergone by him.
7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the
Appellant under the aforementioned section is affirmed and he is
sentenced to the period already undergone by him. The fine
sentence is affirmed.
8. It is reported that the Appellant is in jail, he be released forthwith if
not required in any other case.
9. 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
Saurabh
