Chattisgarh High Court
Hari Krishna Das vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 April, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:16792
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2020
Hari Krishna Das S/o Shri Devendra Das Aged About 48 Years R/o Mana
Camp Colony, Police Station Mana, Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh.
... Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
_________________________________________________________
For Appellant : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate
For State/Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, PL
__________________________________________________________
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Judgment On Board
09/04/2025
1. Today when the matter is called out for hearing, no one appeared
on behalf of the appellant I, therefore, requested for assistance
from a Counsel of the High Court Legal Aid Services Committee,
Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate has been nominated to assist the
Court.
2. I have gone through the judgment under appeal and the
depositions of witnesses and exhibits assisted both by Advocate,
Mr. Krishna Tandon through the High Court Legal Services
Committee and Learned State Counsel. In view of (2014) 14 SCC
222 (Surya Baksh Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh), I do not
consider it necessary to adjourn this case and issue fresh notice to
the Appellant as his interest has been duly taken care of by
nominating another Counsel from the High Court Legal Services
Committee.
3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (henceforth 'the Cr.P.C.')
questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 23.11.2019 passed in Special Criminal Case No.01/18 by
the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur (C.G.), whereby the
appellant convicted and sentenced as under :-
Conviction Sentence In Default
Under Section 354 R.I. for 02 years and In default of
of IPC fine amount of payment of
Rs.500/- fine amount,
further RI for
one month
Under Section 323 R.I. for 04 months In default of
of IPC and fine amount of payment of
Rs.500/- fine amount,
further RI for
one month
Under Section 294 R.I. for 01 month -----
of IPC
Under Section 3(2) R.I. for 06 months In default of
(va) of the and fine amount of payment of
Scheduled Castes Rs.500/- fine amount,
& Scheduled further RI for
Tribes (Prevention one month
of Atrocities) Act
4. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the victim is resident of
village Tuta, District-Raipur and working as a daily wager labour.
About two years prior of incident, victim was working as a labour
in garden nursery at Mana where accused was also working as a
Supervisor and was misbehaving with her with malafide intention,
therefore, being disturbed by the behavior of accused, the victim
had to quit her job. On 01.12.2017 at 4:00 PM, when victim was
going to the market with her daughter, accused Hari Krishna Das
came on his motorcycle and followed victim and her daughter and
was also using abusive words and when both mother and daughter
reached in front of home of Banarasi, the victim was slammed on
the ground and physically abused and threaten to kill, because of
which an injury occurred on right hand.
5. After incident, victim went to house of Banarasi and informed
about the incident to Banarasi and thereafter filed an F.I.R. in
Abhanpur Police Station. Spot map of the place of incident was
prepared, caste certificate of the victim was seized and seizure
memo was prepared, statement of witnesses was recorded under
Section 161 CrPC and after other necessary investigation
proceedings, charge-sheet was filed against the accused under
Sections 354, 294, 506, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act.
6. In order to prove the charges against the appellant (accused),
prosecution examined as many as 08 witnesses. Statement of
appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which
he pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence
witness was examined by the appellant.
7. After appreciation of evidence available on record, learned trial
Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in
paragraph 03 of this appeal. Hence, this appeal.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the
learned trial Court has wrongly been convicted the appellant
without any sufficient and clinching evidence available on record
against the appellant. He further contended that the lodging of
First Information Report was pre-planned as the victim was
removed from her job by accused due to irregularities committed
by her while performing her duties. The victim stated about
different story of incident to the person namely Revthy allegation.
from her allegation. He further contended that it is revealed by the
statement of Anil Banarasi (PW-3) allegation made by victim is
fabricated. Further, the statement given by the doctor that the
injury which is found on hand of victim may have been framed by
herself. The seizer witness stating that no vehicle was seized from
the accused whereas the victim said that the accused came with
his motorcycle. It is also contended that the independent witnesses
not supported the case of prosecution. It is therefore, prayed that
this Court may kindly be set aside the impugned judgment dated
23.11.2019 and the appellant may be acquitted from the charges
levelled against him.
9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent
opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant and
supported the impugned judgment passed by the Court below.
10. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and
perused entire evidence adduced by the prosecution and gone
through the evidence available on record with utmost
circumspection.
11. In order to consider the version of the victim, I have to
examine the evidence/material placed on record by the
prosecution. Victim (PW-1) in Para-2, has stated in her evidence
recorded before the trial Court that 03 years ago, the accused came
to her village Tuta and took her, Bhuri and Shyamabai to work in
Mana's garden to water the garden. The accused used to work as a
security guard in Mana's garden. The accused made her work as a
labourer for two days. On the third day too, when she went to
work, the accused molested her in Mana's garden and beat her up
saying that he will do dirty things. She ran away to her home and
stopped working in the garden. After this, the accused started
following her and molested her three times. She went to the
accused's mother-in-law, whose name is not known, three times
and tried to make the accused understand. The accused's mother-
in-law tried to make the accused understand but when he did not
listen, the mother-in-law asked her to file a report.
12. This witness has stated in Para-3 of statement that in the month of
December, 2017, she and her daughter were going to the market in
Teli Talab in village Tuta. On the way, the accused came on a
Honda motorcycle and chased her and her daughter. The accused
abused her and said that she don't do dirty things with him. The
accused chased her and threw her near Banarasi's house and beat
her up and do misbehave with her by touching her body. After the
incident, Banarasi and his wife Revati came to their house and she
told them about the incident. Her hand was injured which she told
Banarasi and his wife about. The bangle on her hand was broken.
13. Revti (PW-2) has stated in her statement that the victim had told
the name of the person who committed the crime as Harikrishna.
The victim had not told that Harikrishna/accused molested her and
when she objected, he beat her up due to which she got injured in
the hand.
14. Anil Kumar (PW-3) has stated in his statement that the victim had
told him that the accused had caught the victim outside our house's
ranch by abusing her and had thrown her down with the intention
of humiliating her, had threatened to kill her and had beaten her.
He further stated that "it is wrong to say that the victim's bangle
was broken and she had an injury on her hand."
15. Dr. Smt. S.D. Kanwar (PW-4) posted as Medical Officer in the
Community Health Center, Abhanpur District Raipur (C.G.), who
examined the victim and found the following injuries during her
examination-
(I) There was a bruise on the upper part of his right
wrist in the shape of a line measuring 1/4 cm by 1/2
inch.
(ii) There was a bruise on the upper part of his left
wrist in the shape of a line measuring 1/4 cm by 1/2
inch.
(iii) She had pain and swelling in the middle finger
of his right hand. On examination, she said that it
was painful.
The doctor had advised her to get an X-ray of her right hand and
right finger done. The said injury was done within 3 to 6 hours of
the examination. The said injury was of normal nature as per her
examination. Her report is Exhibit P-2. She stated that if a person
falls on the mud while running, the injured will get the above
injuries. The witness herself said that by falling on the mud, other
parts of the body will also get injured.
16. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant on the
ground that the evidence adduced by prosecution has established
beyond doubt that on the date of incident, the act committed by the
accused with a view to outrage the modesty of the victim. The said
finding recorded by the trial Court is based upon the evidence
available on record which is not perverse nor contrary to the
records. Thus, in considered opinion of this Court that the trial
Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC as well as other
offence as mentioned in Para-3 of this appeal. I do not find any
illegality and irregularity or jurisdictional error in the findings
recorded by the trial Court with regard to the conviction part.
Thus, conviction of appellant is hereby affirmed/maintained.
17. As regards the quantum of sentence, considering that incident in
question took place in the month of December, 2017 and now
almost 07 years have passed. During these years, appellant must
have suffered tremendous mental trauma and anguish of trial.
Further considering that maximum jail sentence awarded to the
appellant is two years, and he has granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 16.11.2021, so keeping in view all the circumstances,
ends of justice will be served if the sentence under Section 354 of
IPC imposed upon appellant is reduced from RI 02 years to RI 01
year.
18. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the
conviction and sentence of appellant under Sections 323, 294 of
IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are hereby
affirmed/maintained. However, sentence under Section 354 of IPC
imposed upon the appellant by the trial Court is reduced from 02
years to 01 year and the fine amount imposed upon him is
enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of
fine amount, appellant shall further undergo RI for one month.
19. With the aforesaid observations, the instant appeal is partly
allowed to the extent shown above.
20. Records of the Court below be sent back along with copy of this
judgment for information and necessary compliance.
Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
Vasant
