Chattisgarh High Court
Paramjeet Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 February, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:10127
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 498 of 2007
• Paramjeet Singh S/o Jogendra Silngh, Aged about 50
years, R/o Bhagat Singh Ward Dongergarh, Tahsil and
Thana - Dongergarh, District- Rajnandgaon, C.G.
... Appellant
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Policeeeee Station
Rajnandgaon, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.).
... Respondent
For Appellant : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate.
For State/Respondent : Mr. Vivek Mishra, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
28/02/2025
1 The present appeal arises out of the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
12.06.2007 passed by the learned Special Judge,
Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Special Case No. 61/2006
whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted and
sentenced the appellant as under :
Conviction Sentence
U/s 325 of IPC R.I. for 01 year with fine of Rs.
5000/-; in default of payment
of fine amount additional R.I.
for 06 month.
2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on
24.07.2006 at about 10:00 Pm, the accused and
Santosh Kumar met at Kalyan Shaw Mill to find a place
to park their vehicle. Thereafter the accused allegedly
took Santosh Kumar to a room, closed the door and
abuse and assaulted him by way of bamboo stick for
stealing diesel and threatened to kill him. Thereafter,
Santosh Kumar reported the incident to the Police
Station Rajnandgaon and offence was registered
against the present appellant under Sections 294, 325
and 506-B of IPC and 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities), Act,
3 During the course of trial, in order to bring home the
offence, the complainant has examined as many as 06
witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. The statement
of the appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of
the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances
appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false
implication in the case.
4 After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 12.06.2007,
learned trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the
offence punishable under Sections 294, 506-B of IPC
and 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
and convicted and sentenced the appellant for the
offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment.
Hence, the present appeal.
5 Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits
that he is not pressing the appeal so far as it relates to
the conviction part of the judgment and would confine
his argument to the sentence part thereof only.
According to him, the incident is said to have taken
place in the year 2006, and thereby more than 18 years
have rolled by since then. At present, the appellant is
aged about more than 68 years and the appellant has
already remained in jail for about 01 day, and no useful
purpose would be served in again sending him to jail,
therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be
appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
6 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State,
supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the
arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for
appellant.
7 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material on record including the impugned judgment.
8 Dr. B.L. Kumare (PW-2) examined the injured Santosh
Kumar Tandon (PW-1) and gave his report vide exhibit
P/5. According to his report exhibit P/5, total four
injuries were found out of which one swelling on right
heel was found and two abrasions were found and one
contusion was found on the right side of his neck. Dr.
B.L. Kumare (PW-2) advised him for x-ray of his left
hand and left leg. As per x-ray report (Ex-P/10) given
by Dr. Y.K. Tiwari, only one fracture was found on the
fifth metacarpal bone of injured's left hand.
9 Having gone through the material available on record
and the evidence of the witnesses, Santosh Kumar (PW-
1), Dr. B.L. Kumare (PW-2), Dr. Y.K. Tiwari (PW-3) and
Devendra Potai (PW-6), establish the involvement of the
appellant in the crime in question. This Court does not
see any illegality in the findings recorded by the Trial
Court as regards conviction of the appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC.
10 As regards sentence, keeping in view the facts that the
incident had taken place on 24.07.2006 about more
than 18 years ago and further considering the facts
and circumstances of the case and also considering the
fact that there is no previous criminal antecedents of
the appellant and dispute arose over a pity matter and
only a bone fracture was found on the fifth metacarpal
bone of injured's left hand, and the appellant has
already remained in jail for about 01 day, this court is
of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served
if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by
him by enhancing the fine amount imposed by the
learned trial Court.
11 In view of the above consideration, I do not feel it
appropriate to send back the appellant to jail. Hence,
the appellant is sentenced to the period already
undergone by him i.e., about 01 day instead of
suffering rigorous imprisonment for 01 year for the
offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC. However,
the fine amount of Rs. 5000/- imposed upon the
appellant by the trial Court for the offence punishable
under Section 325 of IPC is hereby enhanced to Rs.
10,000/- which shall be payable by the appellant,
failing which the appellant shall be liable to undergo
R.I. for 06 months. Fine, if any, deposited by the
appellant shall be adjusted in the fine
imposed/enhanced by this Court today.
12 Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the
extent indicated above.
13 Appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall continue for a
further period of 6 months as per requirement of
Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.
14 Record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy
of this judgment forthwith for information and
necessary action, if any.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
Sourabh P.
