Chattisgarh High Court
Vikash Manikpuri vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 July, 2025
1
Digitally
signed by
SOURABH
SOURABH PATEL
PATEL Date:
2025.07.31
2025:CGHC:37033
16:00:34
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 723 of 2025
1 - Vikash Manikpuri S/o Shri Pardeshi Manikpuri, Aged About 26
Years, R/o- Village- Kusami And Police Station- Palari, District-
Bloudabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.).
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Raipur,
District- Raipur (C.G.).
... Respondent
For applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Mr. K. K. Baharani, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order On Board
29.07.2025
1. The present revision arises out of the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 10.06.2025 passed by
the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, in Cr. Appeal No.
476/2024 whereby, the learned appellate Court has partially
modified the conviction and sentence of the accused/applicant
as awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Raipur, vide its judgment dated 29.11.2024 in Criminal Case
No. 1371/2014. The conviction and sentence of the applicant
are as under:-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 411 of IPC R.I. for 03 months and fine of Rs. 100/-,
in default of payment of fine amount S.I.
for 07 days.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 27.05.2023, at about 10:00
a.m., the complainant, Smt. Kalpana Verma (PW-2), boarded a
bus from Raipur Bus Stand to her parental home in Village
Mohra, along with her two minor children. At Kharora Bus
Stand, she got down with her luggage and handbag, and her
brother, Manoj Verma (PW-4), picked her up on his motorcycle.
They stopped at a sugarcane juice shop at Tigada Chowk,
Kharora, where she left her handbag containing gold and silver
ornaments, mobile phone, cash, Aadhaar card, and PAN card.
When she reached her destination and realized she had
forgotten her handbag, she returned to the sugarcane juice
shop, but it was nowhere to be found. She reported the incident
to the police station on 11.06.2023, and an FIR (Exhibit P-1)
was registered under Section 379 of IPC against unknown
persons. During the investigation, the accused persons'
memorandum statements (Exhibits P-15 and P-16) were
recorded. Pursuant to their disclosure statements, stolen
articles were recovered from them, including gold and silver
ornaments. The recovered articles were identified by the
complainant and returned to her after due verification. At the
instance of complainant, an FIR was registered against the
applicant and co-accused person.
3. So as to hold the accused/applicant guilty, the prosecution has
examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 24
documents. Statement of the accused/applicant was also
recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied
the charge leveled against him and pleaded innocence and false
implication in the case.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that he is not
pressing the revision 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 2023, and thereby more than 02 years
have rolled by since then. He is aged about more than 35 years.
The applicant has already remained in jail about 06 days during
trial and from the date of judgment 10.06.2025 to 15.07.2025
total about 01 month 12 days, 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.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting
the impugned judgments, opposed the arguments advanced on
behalf of the counsel for applicant.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
on record including the impugned judgments.
7. Having gone through the material on record and the evidence of
the witnesses Kalpana Verma (PW-2), Manoj Verma (PW-4),
Sunil Verma (PW-6) and Hilal tandon (PW-11), involvement of
the accused/applicant in the crime in question stands proved
beyond reasonable doubt. This Court does not see any illegality
in the findings recorded by both the Courts below as regards
conviction of the applicant under Section 411 of IPC.
8. 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."
9. In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact
that maximum sentence imposed upon the applicant is 03
months, out of which he has already served the jail sentence
about 01 month and 12 days, no criminal antecedent of the
applicant is recorded in the arrest memo, he has studied upto
09th class and working as a driver and also considering the
facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion
that the ends of justice would serve if the applicant is sentenced
to the period already undergone by him.
10. Accordingly, the conviction of the applicant under Section 411
of IPC is maintained but his jail sentence is reduced to the
period already undergone by him i.e. 01 month 12 days.
However, the fine amount of Rs. 100/- imposed upon the
applicant is hereby enhanced to Rs. 3,000/-, and in default
thereof, the applicant shall be liable to undergo S.I. for 01
month. The fine, if any, deposited by the applicant shall be
adjusted in the fine imposed/enhanced by this Court.
11. Consequently, the revision is allowed in part to the extent
indicated herein-above.
12. The applicant is on bail. He need not surrender in this case.
However, his bail bond shall remain in force for a period of six
months.
13. Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment be
sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
Sourabh P.
