1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 996 of 2004 1 - Pyare Lal S/o Ram Avatar, Aged About 22 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.) 2 - Ramdhari S/o Rambriksha, Aged About 50 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Village- Chendara, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.) 3 - Kapil Dev S/o Ram Avtar, Aged About 20 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Mangal Sai S/o Ramdhari, Aged About 25 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Village- Chendara, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Ram Avatar S/o Dheen Das (Died And Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated-12-11- 2024. 6 - Sunder Sai S/o Ramadhari, Aged About 35 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.) 7 - (Abated) Dhola Ram (Died) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 24-03-2025. ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhttisgarh, Though P.S.-Jhilmili, District-Sarguja (C.G.) ... Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishnakant Prajapati on behalf of Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate For State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. GA Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board 24/03/2025 2 This appeal under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short Act of CrPC) has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.11.2004 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur, CG in Sessions Trial No. 359/03. By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as mentioned below: Conviction Sentence Under Section 147 IPC RI for 6 month Under Section 323/149 IPC RI for 6 month Under Section 324/149 IPC RI for 1 year Under Section 323/149 IPC RI for 6 month Under Section 325/149 IPC RI for 2 year and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine 6 months additional RI. Under Section 148 IPC RI for 1 year (All sentences to run concurrently) 2. Prosecution case : On 20.06.2003 at about 6 AM the complainant Sant Lal, along with Rudra Prasad, Nand Lal and Laxmania had gone to the field for sowing paddy. When Laxmania was sitting on the bund, the accused/appellants came there. Accused Pyare Lal tried to restrain them from tilling the field. Accused Pyarelal and Ram Avtar were carrying axe, accused Kapil Deo and Magal Sai were carrying club, accused Ram Dhari and Sunder Sai were carrying crowbar. They restrained Sant Lal, Nand Lal and Rudra Prasad from cultivating the land claiming that to be theirs. In prosecution of common object they started assaulting with crowbar, club and axe carried by them, as a result of which Nand Lal suffered injury on head, left arm, both legs; Sant Lal suffered injury on right arm, left foot, waist and left arm; Rudra Prasad suffered injury on right arm and head whereas Laxmania 3 was also subjected to thrashing with hands and fists. Thereupon, Rudra Prasad rushed to the village and informed him and other villagers about the incident. Injured Nand Lal was brought home. Thereafter, complainant went to the police station and lodged a report against the accused/appellants for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC. After ensuring medical examination of the injured persons and completion of investigation charge- sheet was filed against the appellants under Sections 147, 148, 323/149 twice, 324/149 and 307/149 IPC followed by framing of charge accordingly. The appellants denied the charges and claimed trial. 3. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants under Section 313 CrPC were also recorded where they pleaded their innocence and false implication. 4. After hearing the parties, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned above. Hence this appeal. 5. Is it relevant to mention here that during the pendency of this appeal accused Ram Avatar and Dhola Ram passed away and the appeal as regards Ram Avatar stood abated on 12.11.2024 whereas that of Dhola Ram on 24.03.2025. This appeal now is in respect of the five surviving accused/appellants only. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused/appellants beyond all reasonable doubts. He submits that the complainant party had also indulged in beating the accused persons herein and at their instance a complaint was made against him also and therefore, as a counter blast this case has been foisted on them. He submits that if this Court is not convinced on merits of the case, looking to the fact that the accused/appellants remained on bail during the trial as also during the pendency of this appeal; that the appellants and the complainant party are resident of the same village, that no enmity between them remains as of now, that no criminal antecedent is there against the accused/appellants, that all the accused persons by now must have reached an advanced age, and looking to the period for which they 4 remained in jail, either the sentence imposed on them may be reduced to the period already undergone or they may be extended the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. 7. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/State supports the judgment impugned to be in accordance with law and the evidence led by the parties, and being so no interference in this appeal is required. He further tries to strengthen his case by arguing that injured Nand Lal had suffered fracture and his testimony gets corroboration from the medical evidence, the conviction of the accused/appellants cannot be interfered with. Even the sentence imposed on the appellants is argued to be quite adequate and needs no reduction. 8. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. Though on seizure from accused Ramdhari which Shiv Varth (PW-1) this witness has not supported the case of the prosecution yet he has stated that injured Nand Lal and Inzor Sai assaulted the accused Ram Avatar with club whereas injured Sant Lal assaulted accused Pyare Lal with axe. He has however supported the seizure of axe from accused Pyare Lal, that of club from accused Ram Avatar, that of crowbar from accused Sunder Sai. From the statement of complainant Sant Lal (PW-2) it is apparent that he was assaulted by accused Sunder Sai, injured Nand Lal was caught hold by accused Dhola and was assaulted by accused Ramdhar and Kapil Deo with crowbar and club, injured Rudra Prasad was assaulted by accused Pyare Lal with axe and Laxamia Bai who tried to intervene in the matter, was also subjected to beating. He has however stated that the dispute erupted suddenly on account of some land related matter. Deo Saran (PW-5) has also supported the case of the prosecution stating that on the date of incident at about 8 AM when the injured persons were working in the field, accused persons came there carrying club, pick axe and crowbar and started beating them. Sant Lal is stated to have suffered injury on foot; Rudra Prasad on head and Nand Lal on legs. The bones of legs of Nand Lal are stated to 5 have been smashed. From his statement also the dispute appears to relate to cultivation of land. Budh Ram (PW-6), Laxmania (PW-7), Bugli Bai (PW-8), Nand Lal (PW-10), Kunti Bai (PW-11) and Rudra Prasad (PW-12) have also supported the case of the prosecution describing as to who was having which weapon and also attributing the role against each of them. Dr. J. K. Jain (PW-16) is the witness who medically examined the injured persons and gave his report. Injured Rudra Prasad was having one incised wound on head caused by hard and sharp edged object; injured Nand Lal was having swelling, incised wound on right leg, contusion on fore arm and right hand; injured Sant Lal was having swelling and abrasion on certain parts of his body. These injuries are opined by this witness to have been caused by different weapons and are of different diameters. The radiologist (PW-15) after seen the X-ray has noticed fracture on right tibia, left tibia and bone of the head of injured Nand Lal. 10. From the aforesaid discussion made in the light of evidence of the witnesses as also that of the doctors who medically examined the injured persons, the findings recorded by the Court below as regards conviction part of the judgment impugned, they being fully based on the evidence collected by the prosecution, do not appear to suffer from any illegality or infirmity. The statements of injured witnesses get full corroboration from the medical evidence. Accordingly, the conviction of accused/appellants as described above is hereby maintained. 11. As regards sentence, looking to the fact that the accused/appellants remained on bail during the trial as also during the pendency of this appeal; that the appellants and the complainant party are residents of the same village; that no enmity between them remains as of now; that no criminal antecedent is brought to the notice of this Court against the accused/appellants; that all the accused persons by now must have reached an advanced age, that they remained in jail for 21 days, this Court is of the consider opinion that no useful purpose would be served in further making them 6 remain in jail and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence imposed on them is reduced to the period undergone. Fine sentence however is liable to be left undisturbed. Order accordingly. 12. Copy of this judgment and record be sent back. The appellants are on bail, their bail bond will remain in operation for a period of six months in view of Section 481 of BNSS, 2023 13. Appeal thus allowed in part. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan/J