Prahlad Netam vs Roshan Vishwakarma And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 5271 Chatt

                                          1


                                                                               NAFR
                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            Criminal Revision No. 17 of 2016
     Prahlad Netam S/o. Late Shri Rameshar Netam, aged about 47 years, R/o.
      Village - Kutaru, Thana - Saja, Civil & Revenue, District - Bemetara (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Applicant/Petitioner
                                     Versus
   1. Roshan Vishwakarma S/o. Shri Shatrughan Vishwakarma, aged about 28
      years
   2. Dharmendra Vishwakarma S/o. Shri Aaskaran Vishwakarma, aged about 33
      years
   3. Yogeshwar Vishwakarma S/o. Shri Ashok Vishwakarma, aged about 23
      years

       All are residents of Village - Kutaru, Thana - Saja, Civil & Revenue District -
       Bemetara (C.G.)

   4. State of Chhattisgarh, through the District Magistrate Bemetara, District
      Bemetara (C.G.)
                                            ---- Non-applicants/Respondents

  For Applicant                   :      Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate
  For Non-Applicants 1 to 3       :      Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate appears
                                         on behalf of Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate
  For Non-Applicant No. 4/State :        Ms. Priyamvada Singh, Deputy
                                         Government Advocate
                  Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
                                Order on Board
22.08.2022

1. Non-applicants 1 to 3 were prosecuted for the offences punishable under

Sections 294, 506 B & 323 read with Section 34 of IPC in Criminal Case No.

303/2014 on complaint of the present applicant. The charges under these

sections were framed by the learned trial Court. Non-applicants 1 to 3

abjured the charges and pleaded non-guilty. The learned trial Court after

appreciation of the evidence and going through the charge-sheet filed by the

police, acquitted them from charges of Sections 294 & 506 B of IPC and

convicted them under Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and imposed

only fine of Rs800/- - Rs.800/- to each of the accused persons vide

judgment dated 24.01.2015.

2. The applicant herein challenged the judgment passed by the learned trial

Court dated 24.01.2015 on the ground that the learned trial Court has

committed illegality by acquitting non-applicants 1 to 3 for offences

punishable under Sections 294 & 506 B of IPC and further the trial Court

has committed mistake by imposing fine of Rs.800/- to each of the accused

persons only, whereas accused persons should have been awarded jail

sentence under Section 323 of IPC. The learned lower appellate Court

affirmed the finding recorded by the trial Court regarding acquittal of non-

applicants 1 to 3 from charges under Sections 294 & 506 B of IPC and

conviction & sentence under Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC. Thus,

the learned lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the

applicant.

3. The applicant has preferred the instant criminal revision under Section

397/401 of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence

passed by the courts below on the ground that the courts below have failed

to award jail sentence to non-applicants 1 to 3 under Section 323 of IPC.

4. At this stage Mr. Samir Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Amit

Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for non-applicants 1 to 3 jointly submit that the

relations between the applicant and non-applicants 1 to 3 have become

cordial and at present the applicant who was complainant before the trial

Court does not want to prosecute this criminal revision further more. Further,

this revision has been filed for enhancement of the punishment and the

same can be withdrawn by the applicant.

5. In view of the above submissions made by the parties, permission is granted

to the applicant to withdraw this criminal revision.

6. Consequently, this criminal revision is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

vatti