Hari Shanker vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2369 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Hari Shanker vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2025

                                                        1




                                                                                       NAFR

                          HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                            CRR No. 198 of 2016

             Hari Shanker S/o Purushottam Yadav Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Banari,
             Police Station Janjgir Champa, Tahsil Janjgir And District Janjgir Champa,
             Chhattisgarh.,
Digitally
signed by                                                                         ... Applicant
ANJANI
KUMAR                                                 versus
ALLENA
Date:
2025.03.10
             State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Police Station Janjgir, In
17:05:54
+0530        District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                 ... Respondent

             For Applicant          :   Shri Ritesh Verma, Advocate.
             For Respondent         :   Smt. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer.


                              (HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL)

                                              Order on Board

             10/03/2025
                   Heard.

1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.02.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.132/2010 by the Sessions Judge, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) whereby the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal while upholding the conviction under Section 379 IPC and sentence of 6 months RI with fine of Rs.100/- and in default thereof, further SI for 10 days, as passed by the Court of J.M.F.C. Link Court, Janjgir in Criminal Case No. 844/2007 vide its judgment dated 26.08.2010.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.06.2007, the complainant lodged a report at Police Station Janjgir that buffaloes and bagaar buffalo total 6 numbers, worth Rs.33,000/- were found missed on 12.06.2007. On his report, F.I.R. vide Ex.P.6 was lodged and during investigation, the applicant

was arrested and from his possession, the cattle property worth Rs.33,000/- was seized vide Ex.P.7

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Janjgir. The applicant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence.

4. Learned trial Court as well as the appellate Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted the applicant as shown in para 1 of this order. Hence, this revision.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that he does not challenge the conviction of the applicant, but challenging the quantum of sentence, which, according to him, is on higher side. He further submits that the incident is of 2007 and that he has no criminal antecedents and is facing the lis since 2007, i.e. for more than 18 years. The applicant remained in jail from 13.06.2007 to 23.06.2007 (11 days) and then from 26.02.2016 to 02.03.2016 (6 days) and thus incarcerated jail sentence for a period of 17 days. Lastly, he submits that fine amount has been deposited. On these premises, he urged that the applicant may be sentenced to the period already undergone by him.

6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the revision while supporting the impugned judgment.

7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record minutely.

8. Considering the statement of complainant Bhagwat Prasad (P.W.1) supported by the evidence of P.W.2 Sukrut Das, P.W.8 Rajeshwar and that of P.W.5 Smt. Sadhana Singh, Investigating Officer and further considering the material documents available on record, I am of the view that the finding of the learned trial Court as well as by the appellate Court with respect to conviction of the applicant does not call for interference and I hereby upheld the same.

9. As regards jail sentence of the applicant, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, considering that the applicant

remained in jail for a period of 17 days and he is facing the lis since 2007, i.e., more than 18 years and there are no criminal antecedents against him, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the applicant by the trial Court and appellate Court, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, fine sentence and default sentence awarded by the trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court shall remain in tact.

10. Consequently, the revision is allowed in part. The conviction of the applicant under the aforesaid section is affirmed and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, therefore, his bail bonds shall be in force for a period of six months as per the provisions contained in Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.

Sd/-

(Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE

Anjani