Jaglal @ Jagpal Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2426 Chatt

                                        1

                                                                           NAFR
           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                             CRR No. 114 of 2012
   • Jaglal @ Jagpal Singh S/o Ramkishun Gond, aged about 36 years R/o
     Village Tengani, P.S. Patna, District- Korea, C.G.          ---- Applicant

                                    Versus

   • State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Korea, District- Korea
     C.G.                                                   ----Respondent

_____________________________________________________________
     For Appellant   :  Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate.
     For Respondent/State :     Mr. Ankur Kashyap, P.L.




               Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel
                              Order On Board

12/04/2022

  1. This revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 30.01.2012

     passed in CRA No.42 of 2008 by 1 st Additional Sessions Judge,

     Manindragarh at Baikunthpur, District - Koriya, (C.G.), whereby learned

     Additional Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment of conviction dated

     02.05.2008 passed by JMFC, Baikunthpur in criminal Case No.360 of 2007.


  2. Facts

of the case are that, on 17.11.2007 at about 5:30 pm complainant was

in her house alone, allegedly applicant entered in the house and caught hold

her hands. On being shouted, her husband and sons reached there, then

the applicant fled away from the spot. Matter was reported by the

complainant. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed. After

completion of trial, learned JMFC convicted the applicant for the offence

punishable under Sections 452 & 354 of the IPC and sentenced him R.I. for

six months and fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively with default stipulation.

Against the said judgment of conviction and sentence, an appeal has been

preferred by the respondent/accused before learned 1 st Additional Sessions

Judge, Manindragarh, wherein, vide judgment dated 30.01.2012, learned

A.S.J. Manindragarh affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence

imposed upon the accused by the Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Baikunthpur. Hence, this appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he do not want to press this

revision on merits and confines his argument on sentence part only. It is

submitted by him that in this case the applicant has already undergone

about 5 days in jail and there is no previous criminal antecedent against

him, he is facing the lis since 2007, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant

may be sentenced to the period already undergone by him.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel supports the impugned judgment and

submits that the sentence awarded by the trial Court is just and proper and

requires no interference.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record

minutely.

6. Considering the facts that the accused/applicant has already undergone

about 5 days, he is facing the lis since 2007 and there is no previous

criminal antecedent against him, I am of the view that the ends of justice

would be met if, while convicting the applicant under Sections 452 & 354 of

the IPC, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already

undergone by him, and he is directed to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- under

Section 452 of the IPC and Rs.5,000/- under Section 354 of the IPC.

Ordered accordingly. The above fine amount shall be payable within three

months from the receipt of this judgment. In default of payment of fine, the

applicant shall be liable to undergo S.I. for 6 months in each of the offences.

7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above.

8. 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

Ravi