Chattisgarh High Court
Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 July, 2025
1
Digitally signed
by BHOLA
NATH KHATAI
Date:
2025.07.10
14:26:15 +0530
2025:CGHC:31579
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 879 of 2025
Shivam Dubey S/o Shri Kewal Dubey Aged About 19 Years R/o
P.O. And Village - Mahoi, P.S. - Sarwai, Distt. - Chhattarpur
(M.P.), Present Address - Adarsh Nagar, Kushalpur, P.S.- Purani
Basti, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.)
--- Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Purani Basti, Raipur
(C.G.)
--- Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L.
Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu S/o Shambhu Das Manikpuri Aged
About 21 Years R/o Near Raju Kirana Stores, Ramayan Nagar
P.S. Purani Basti Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G. )
---Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Purani Basti District-
Raipur ( C.G. )
--- Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate
For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
09/07/2025
1 Since both the appeals have arisen out of the same
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence,
they are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2 Both the appeals under Section 415 (2) of BNSS, 2023
have been filed against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 30.01.2025 passed by learned 12 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.), in Sessions Trial
No.45/2024 whereby the appellants have been convicted
and sentenced as under :
Conviction Sentence
R.I. for 3 years with fine of
U/s 326 of IPC Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of
fine, additional S.I. for 3 months.
3 The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 01.12.2023 at
about 9 p.m., the appellants demanded money from the
victim/injured Deepak Sahu to buy liquor. When he
refused, appellant Shiva took out a tube of Solution and
both the appellants applied the Solution on Deepak's body
and cloths. Then appellant Shivam took out a matchstick
and lit it and set Deepak on fire. Deepak Sahu was
immediately taken to Vaidehi Hospital, Bhatagaon, Raipur
for treatment. A report being made in this regard, FIR was
registered and after completion of investigation charge
sheet was filed against the appellants.
4 So as to hold the appellants guilty, the prosecution has
examined as many as 9 witnesses and exhibited 35
documents in support of its case. The statement of the
appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the
Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing
against them and pleaded innocence and false implication
in the case.
5 After appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence
available on record, vide impugned judgment, learned trial
Court convicted and sentenced the appellants for the
offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence,
the present appeal.
6 Learned counsel for the appellants 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. He submits that appellant
Shiva is in jail since 03.12.2023 and appellant Shivam is
in jail since 05.12.2023. The maximum sentence imposed
upon the appellants is 3 years, out of which they have
already served the jail sentence of about 1 year 7 months
and 1 week. Fine amount has already been paid. Therefore,
considering all these facts, the sentence imposed upon the
appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone
by them and they may be released from jail.
7 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State,
supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the
arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for
appellants. He submits that appellant Shiva has two
criminal past records.
8 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
9 Having gone through the material available on record and
the statements of the injured Deepak Sahu (PW-1) his
mother Tulsi Sahu (PW-3), witness Rakhi Sahu (PW-2), Dr.
Dipesh Shah (PW-6) and the medical reports of the injured,
the involvement of the appellants in the crime in question
is clearly established. This Court does not see any illegality
in the findings recorded by the Trial Court as regards
conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable
under Sections 326 of IPC.
10 As regards sentence, in the matter of Mohammad
Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1977)
3 SCC 287, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that if
you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure
him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and,
men are not improved by injuries and held in para-9 as
follows:
"9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from
their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual
Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then
Britain, said in 1817 :
"The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri
has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the
criminal commits it'. George Nicodotis, Director of
Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece,
maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of
the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that
crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal
can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to
rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture
that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be
countered not by undue cruelty but by re-
culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in
penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging
him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage
punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive
times. The human today views sentencing as a
process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated
into criminality and the modern community has a
primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender
as a means of social defense. We, therefore
consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem'
outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts,
since brutal incarceration of the person merely
produces laceration of his mind. In the words of
George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man
retributively, you must injure him. If you are to
reform him, you must improve him and, men are
not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves
the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey
Streatfield : "If you are going to have anything to do
with the criminal Courts, you should see for
yourself the conditions under which prisoners
serve their sentences."
11 In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the
case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view
the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the
appellants is 3 years, out of which they have already
served the jail sentence of about 1 year, 7 months and 1
week and also considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and the fact that the appellants
are youths aged around 20-21 years, this Court is of the
opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the
appellants are sentenced to the period already undergone
by them.
12 Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants under Section
326 of IPC is maintained but their jail sentence is reduced
to the period already undergone by them i.e. 1 year, 7
months & 1 week. However, the fine amount is enhanced
from Rs.1,000 to Rs.10,000, which shall be paid to the
injured Deepak Sahu. In default of payment of fine, the
appellants shall undergo RI for 6 months. If any fine
amount has already been deposited by the appellants, it
shall be adjusted.
13 Consequently, both the appeals stand allowed in part to
the extent indicated herein-above.
14 The appellants are reported to be in jail. They be released
forthwith if not required to be detained in default of fine
and not required in any other case.
15 Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this
judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and
necessary action, if any. A copy of the judgment may also
be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent wherein the
appellants are suffering the jail sentence.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
Khatai
