Dinesh Vishal vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3413 Chatt

                                                                            NAFR

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                              CRA No. 1360 of 2019

       Dinesh Vishal S/o Prahlad Vishal, aged about 22 years, R/o Village
       Bardih, P.S. Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Appellant

                                     Versus

       State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station
       Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

                                                                ---- Respondent

For Appellant : Shri Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Shri Rajendra Tripathi, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Judgment on Board

30.11.2021

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

29.08.2019 passed in S.T. No.22/2017 by the Additional Sessions

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

been convicted and sentenced as under :

                   Conviction                           Sentence

                 U/s 307 of I.P.C.       R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-
                                         with default stipulations.

2. In this case the victim (PW-9) is the wife of the appellant, their

marriage was solemnized on 16.04.2013 and out of their wed-lock, a

girl child was born. According to case of the prosecution, after the

marriage of sister of the appellant, the appellant used to demand

money from his wife/victim and for this reason quarrel used to take

place between both of them. Further case of the prosecution is that, on

30.12.2016, the appellant committed maar-peet with his wife and

poured kerosene oil upon her and set her ablaze due to which she

sustained 54 per cent burn injuries on her body. During course of

investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded on 16.01.2017

and on the same date a complaint was made by the father of the

victim. On the basis of written complaint and the statement of victim,

offence was registered. Statements of the witnesses were recorded

under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. After completion of the investigation, a

charge-sheet was filed. Trial Court framed charges. To prove the guilt

of the accused/appellant, prosecution has examined as many as 11

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 innocence and false implication in the

matter.

3. After completion of trial, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced

the appellant as mentioned in paragraph 1 of this judgment. Hence,

this appeal.

4. 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 submits that the appellant has completed more

than 4 year 11 month in jail out of 7 year jail sentence imposed upon

him by the concerned Trial Court. He has no criminal antecedents.

Presently, he is aged about 25 years. He further submits that on

perusal of statement of the victim, it appears that after the incident, she

was taken to the hospital by the appellant and his family members and

the expenses of her treatment has also been paid by the appellant and

his family members. Learned counsel further submits that there are

two children of the appellant and they are presently residing with the

appellant's family and there are chances of settlement between the

appellant and his wife, therefore, it is prayed that the appellant may be

reduced to the period already undergone by him or his sentence may

be reduced to some extent.

5. 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.

6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties, perused the

statement of witnesses and other annexed documents available on

record minutely.

7. On minute examination of statements of the witnesses and looking to

the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution, in my considered

view, the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant. I do not find

any infirmity in the order of the trial Court. Thus, conviction of the

appellant is affirmed.

8. With regard to the jail sentence of the appellant, considering the fact

that appellant has already completed about 4 years and 11 months in

the jail, he is not having any previous antecedents, he is a young

person aged about 25 years, he is facing the lis for last 4 years, 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 under Section 307 of the I.P.C. is reduced from 7 years to 5 ½

years (5 years six months). The fine sentence is affirmed and in default

of payment of fine, appellant is liable to undergo further R.I. for two

months.

9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated

above.

10. 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