Ganesh Satnami vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6724 Chatt

                                                                              Page 1 of 2

                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     Order Sheet

                               CRA No. 1020 of 2002

                       Ganesh Satnami Vs. State of Chhattisgarh



10.11.2022         Mr. Sudhir Verma, counsel for the appellant.
                   Mr. Himanshu Kumar Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent.

By the impugned judgment dated 21.08.2002 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 63/2002, the appellant stands convicted, as under:-

                     Conviction                               Sentence
              U/s 363 of IPC            : R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 200/-.
              U/s 366 of IPC            : R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 300/-.
              U/s 376 (I) of IPC     : R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 200/-.
                                       In default of payment of fine amount for each

Section in sequence separately R.I. for three months, three months & five months respectively.

All the sentences to run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that he has filed application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 320 (2) of the Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned judgment of conviction on the basis of compromise and to acquit the appellant enclosing copy of mark-sheets of children and Ration Card. He would further submit that during trial, the appellant has performed marriage with the prosecutrix and they have two children and are living peacefully. He would further submit that the appellant was in jail for 18 days, therefore, the conviction of the appellant may be confined to the period already undergone by him. In support of his contention, he would refer paragraph 11 of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Ravindra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2015 (4) SCC

491 wherein it has been held regarding an adequate and special reason for awarding a lesser sentence exists in terms of proviso to Section 376.

Whether the appellant has performed marriage with the victim and whether the documents annexed by the appellant are genuine, the same has to be examined before this Court.

The Superintendent of Police, Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) is directed to conduct an enquiry and submit its report within three weeks whether the appellant- Ganesh Satnami has performed marriage with the victim or not and the documents annexed by the appellant i.e. photocopy of the mark-sheets of their child and Ration Card are also directed to be verified.

Copy of this order along with the documents annexed by the appellant be provided to the State counsel for onward compliance by the Superintendent of Police, Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) within three weeks.

List this case on 7th December, 2022.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Arun