1 2025:CGHC:3475 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 169 of 2007 Bhawani S/o Shashi Nayak, aged about 25 years, R/o HUDCO, Mig-I, 458, Bhilai, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, Tahsil and District-Durg (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate Durg, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Indira Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. HAPS Bhatia, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 20/01/2025 1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.02.2007 passed by the learned 11th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Durg, Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.01.22 16:12:59 +0530 2 District – Durg (C.G.), in Session Case No.39/2006 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under : Conviction Sentence & in Default U/s 365 of IPC RI for 6 months with fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional imprisonment of 5 days 2. As per the prosecution story, on the date of the incident, 09-09-05, around 8 PM, the complainant’s daughter aged about 19 years, went to the open fields for defecation with her friends. At around 8:15 PM, her friends came and informed the complainant and his wife that while they were returning home after defecation, the accused Bhawani, along with two other co-accused, came in a white-colored Sumo vehicle and stopped the vehicle near them on the road. Bhawani, along with the co-accused, forcibly caught hold of his daughter, covered her mouth, and abducted her in the Sumo vehicle, taking her towards the 25 Million Ton Square. The complainant lodged a written report at Bhilai Nagar Police Station vide Exhibit P-7. Based on the written report, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered vide Exhibit P-8, and the case was taken up for investigation. During the investigation, a site map of the incident location was prepared vide Exhibit P-6. Witness statements were recorded. Daughter of the complainant was recovered, and a recovery memo was prepared vide Exhibit P-1. Subsequently, the vehicle used in the offense was seized, and a seizure memo was prepared vide Exhibit P-2. The accused were arrested. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet was filed. 3. So as to hold the appellant guilty, the prosecution has 3 examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 12 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. However, one defence witness was examined by him in his defence. 4. After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.02.2007, the learned Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument only on sentence part. He also submits that the appellant is aged about 44 years at present and he has already remained in jail for about 77 days. The incident took place in year 2005 and since then the appellant is facing the lis. The appeal is pending since 2007. Hence, it is prayed that the sentence of the appellant for the above offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him in the interest of justice. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supported the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 8. Having gone through the material available on record and the evidence of victim (PW-4), father of the victim/complainant (PW-7) and the witnesses Purnima (PW-5), Savitri (PW-6) & Smt. Alekha Tandi (PW-8), establish the involvement of the appellant in the crime in 4 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 365 of the IPC. 9. As regards the sentence, keeping in view the facts that the incident had taken place in the year 2005 about 19 years ago and further considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that the appellant is aged about 44 years at present, and he has already remained in jail for about 77 days, in the interest of justice, in considered opinion of this Court, it is appropriate to reduce the sentence of the appellant from R.I. for 6 months to the period already undergone by him i.e. 77 days for the offence punishable under Sections 365 of IPC, ordered accordingly. However, the fine amount for the above offence shall remain intact. 10. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove. 11.The appellant is on bail. He need not to surrender in this case. His bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of the provisions contained in Section 437- A of the CrPC. 12. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for information and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Shubham