Chhavilal And Anr vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 550 Chatt

                                                  1

                                                                                             NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                            Criminal Revision No.613 of 2009

    1. Chhavilal, S/o Girwar Singh, Aged 38 years

    2. Bhima, S/o Girwar Singh, Aged 27 years,

        Both R/o Village Tenganmada, P.S. Kota, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.)
                                                                ---- Applicants

                                              Versus

        State of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate, Distt. Bilaspur
        (C.G.)
                                                         ---- Non-applicant

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

For Applicants: Mr. Anand Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant:Mr. Sudeep Verma, Deputy Government Advocate.

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

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

27/01/2023

1. This criminal revision is directed against the impugned judgment dated

28-10-2009 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC),

Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.28/2008, whereby the learned

appellate Court has affirmed the conviction and sentences imposed

upon the applicants under Sections 452, 324 read with Section 34 &

323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that conviction of the

applicants is based on the perverse finding and the maximum

sentence which has been awarded to the applicants is rigorous

imprisonment for six months, whereas, the applicants were in jail from

28-10-2009 to at least till 16-12-2009, therefore, they be sentenced to

the period already undergone by them and the revision be allowed in

part.

3. On the other hand, learned State counsel would support the impugned

judgment.

4. 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.

5. The finding recorded by the two Courts below convicting and

sentencing the applicants under Sections 452, 324 read with Section

34 & 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC, is well merited and is a

finding of fact based on the evidence available on record, it is neither

perverse nor contrary to the record and I do not find any perversity in

the said finding. However, considering the fact that the applicants

remained in jail from 28-10-2009 to at least till 16-12-2009, which is

more than 50 days, I hereby award them the sentence of 50 days

already undergone by them. As such, affirming the conviction of the

applicants under Sections 452, 324 read with Section 34 & 323 read

with Section 34 of the IPC, they are sentenced to the period already

undergone by them i.e. 50 days. However, the sentence of fine

imposed by the trial Court shall remain intact.

6. The criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein-

above.

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma