Deepak Rakshe And Anr vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 920 Chatt

                                                  1

                                                                                             NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                            Criminal Revision No.798 of 2008

    1. Deepak Rakshe, Aged about 23 years, S/o Sunil

    2. Mangesh Ganwai, Aged about 22 years, S/o Babu Ganwai

        Both R/o Village Murtijapur, P.S. Murtijapur, Distt. Akola (M.S.)
                                                                   ---- Applicants

                                              Versus

        State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Tumgaon, Distt. Mahasamund
        (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Non-applicant

                                               AND

                             Criminal Revision No.23 of 2009

    1. Syed Naushad, S/o Liyakat Ali, Aged about 29 years, R/o Village &
        P.S. Murtijapur, Distt. Akola (M.S.)

    2. Syed Moseen, S/o Syed Mobeen, Aged about 31 years, R/o Jail
        Gaon, P.S. Ready Gaon, Distt. Akola (M.S.)
                                                                                   ---- Applicants

                                              Versus

        State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Tumgaon, Distt. Mahasamund
        (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Non-applicant

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Applicants in Cr.Rev.No.798/2008: -

Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate.

For Applicants in Cr.Rev.No.23/2009: -

Mr. Mohd. Azad Siddiqui, Advocate.

For State/non-applicant: Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

13/02/2023

1. Since common question of law and fact is involved in both the

revisions, arising out of common judgment dated 2-12-2008 passed by

the Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, in Criminal Appeal No.131/2008,

they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being

disposed of by this common order.

2. Four applicants herein have been convicted by the trial Court for

offence under Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle

Preservation Act, 2004 and sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for two years and pay a fine of ₹ 1,000/- each, in default

of payment of fine to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment

for two months. The said judgment of the trial Court has been

confirmed by the appellate Court in appeal against which these

revisions have been preferred.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that both the Courts

below are absolutely unjustified in holding that the applicants have

committed the offence by recording a finding perverse to the record,

even otherwise, the applicants ought to have been sentenced only to

fine as the offence in question is punishable with imprisonment or with

fine or with both.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel would oppose both the revisions.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival

submissions made herein-above and also went through the record

with utmost circumspection.

6. Taking into consideration the evidence of seizure witnesses - Sitaram

Soni (PW-2) & Arun Sahu (PW-3), investigating officer - Vishnu

Prasad Sahu (PW-4) and veterinary doctor - Dr. C.S. Chandrakar

(PW-1), who has examined the seized cattle, I am of the considered

opinion that the trial Court is absolutely justified in convicting the

applicants under Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle

Preservation Act, 2004. The said finding recorded by the trial Court

which has been affirmed by the appellate Court is a finding of fact

based on the evidence available on record, it is neither perverse nor

contrary to the record and I hereby affirm the conviction of the

applicants.

7. Now, the question of sentence comes in.

8. The applicants have been convicted for offence under Section 10 of

the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004. Since the

offence under Section 10 of the said Act of 2004 is punishable with

imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to

three years, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or

with both, so far as the sentence is concerned, I hereby sentence the

applicants for the period already undergone by them, however, the

fine is enhanced to ₹ 5,000/- each. Additional amount of ₹ 4,000/-

each will be deposited within a period of 45 days from today, failing

which the applicants will be required to undergo imprisonment for

three months. The criminal revisions are allowed in part to the extent

indicated herein-above.

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma