1 2025:CGHC:16317 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 975 of 2024 Horilal Maravi S/o Chamar Singh Maravi Aged About 49 Years R/o Village- Dhaurabhatha, Police Station- Pali, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Pali, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate with Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Penal Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Judgment on Board 07/04/2025 1. The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgement of conviction and sentence dated 24.04.2024, passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.), in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2020, whereby the VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.04.17 16:27:44 +0530 2 appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- Conviction Sentence U/s. 458 of IPC R.I. for 027years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 02 months. U/s. 324 of IPC R.I. for 02 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 01 month. U/s. 307 of IPC R.I. for 07 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 02 months. All the sentences are directed to be run concurrently 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.01.2020, the complainant Ramkumar Tekam (PW-2) lodged a report to the police that on 31.12.2019, at about 1:00 AM, his daughter Preeti Tekam (PW-3) was being assaulted by the appellant by axe, while she was sleeping in her room and the appellant after broke open the door, committed house breaking by knife and assaulted the victim. The FIR (exhibit P- 1) was registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 458, 323 and 506 of IPC. When the victim Preeti Takam (PW-3) was being taken to hospital on 31.12.2019, a police memo (exhibit P-11) was sent by the CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur to City Kotwali Police, Bilaspur. The victim remain hospitalized at CIMS, Bilaspur from 31.12.2019 to 07.01.2020. When the FIR has been lodged by the complainant Ramkumar Tekam (PW-2), the police has called the MLC report of the victim from Community Health Centre, Pali on 07.01.2020 and Dr. Anil Saraf (PW-13) gave his MLC report (exhibit P-8). While examining the victim on 07.01.2020, he noticed one 3 lacerated wound over the right side of neck and swelling with pain was also there. The police has also seized the medical treatment papers and bedhead ticket of the victim from CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, which are Exhibit P-12 to P-29. A query (exhibit P-31) was also raised by the police from the doctor with respect to the nature of injuries, the object by which the injuries could be caused and whether the injuries are fatal to life or not, then the doctor has replied the query vide Exhibit P-9, and opined that the injuries found on the neck of the victim could have been caused by the seized axe, presence of blood in the axe could be ascertained in FSL report, death may be possible by the injuries inflicted by the said axe, the injuries found on the body of the victim are grievous in nature and she might have died, if she would not have treated in time and the injuries could have been caused by hard and sharp object. 3. Spot map (exhibit P-2) was prepared by the Patwari and Exhibit P-30 was prepared by the Police. The appellant was arrested on 07.01.2020 and his memorandum statement (exhibit P-5) was recorded and based on his memorandum statement, one axe has been seized from him vide seizure memo (exhibit P-6). One half sleeve kurti has been seized from the complainant vide seizure memo (exhibit P-3) and one full sweater has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-4). The axe seized from the appellant, sweater and kurti of the victim were sent for its chemical examination to Regional FSL, Bilaspur, from where report (exhibit P-39) was received and blood has been found on the sent articles. Human 4 blood was found on the kurti and sweater of the victim and the blood on the axe was disintegrated and their original cannot be determined. 4. The statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of CRPC have been recorded and after completion of usual investigation charge sheet was filed for the offence under Sections 458, 323, 324, 307, 506 of IPC against the appellant before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pali, District Korba. The case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Korba, from where the same was transferred to the learned trial Court for its trial. 5. The learned trial Court has framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Sections 458, 324, 307 of IPC. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. 6. In order to prove the charge against the appellant the prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the CRPC has also been recorded, in which he denied the circumstances appears against him, pleaded innocence and has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the offence. 7. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the prosecution, the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in the earlier part of the judgement, hence this appeal. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contraindications in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and their evidence suffers from inconsistency 5 and not sufficient to hold guilty of the appellant in the alleged offence. The report has been lodged belatedly and there is no explanation for delayed lodging of report. The injuries were not grievous in nature. He would also submit that from the evidence of the victim (PW-3), it appears that while she was sleeping, someone has assaulted her and she could not identify the appellant. He would also submit that the appellant was not of sound mind at the time of incident. He would further submit that even if it is found that the appellant has caused injuries to the victim, the offence, if any, does not travel beyond the scope of Section 324 of IPC. The appellant is in jail since 24.04.2024. No minimum sentence is provided under Section 324 of IPC and his undergone period may be considered after altering his conviction for the offence under Section 307 to Section 324 of IPC. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and has submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. But for minor omissions or contradictions, the evidence of prosecution witnesses are fully reliable. The victim (PW- 3) Preeti Tekam has duly identified the appellant at the time of alleged assault that he caused injuries to her by an axe. The nature of injuries found on the neck of the victim (PW-3) has been proved by the doctor, who treated her and opined that the injuries were grievous in nature and death might have possible, if she was not treated in time. The injuries were inflicted in the neck, which is the vital part of the body that too by axe, which is the dangerous weapon, therefore, 6 the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the alleged offence of Section 307 of IPC, which needs no interference. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. PW-3/Ku. Preeti Tekam, is the victim in the case. She stated in her evidence that the appellant is her maternal uncle in relation. On 30.12.2019, in the night, when she was sleeping in her room, at about 1:00 AM, the appellant entered into her room and assaulted her by an axe, which inflicted on her neck. She called her grandmother and thereafter she lost her consciousness. She regain her conscious after about 02 days in the hospital. She remain hospitalized at Bilaspur for about a week. She did not know, as to why the appellant assaulted her. In cross-examination, she stated that the relation between the appellant and her father was cordial and she too had no grievance with the appellant. At the time of incident, she was sleeping. After removal of stitches from her neck, she was discharged from the hospital. She denied that the mental condition of the appellant is disturbed. Nothing in her cross-examination, which makes her evidence doubtful or give presumption that any other person has caused injuries to the victim. From her evidence, it is proved that the appellant has given axe blow on her neck in the night when she was sleeping in her room. She being the injured witness fully supported the prosecution case and fully reliable as the sterling witness to the incident. 7 12. PW-2/Rajkumar Tekam is the father of the victim, who was sleeping in the adjoining room and woke up on the hue and cry raised by his mother. When he went to the room of the victim, he saw that the appellant was there having axe in his hand and tried to give second blow on the victim. He caught him hold and took him in the lane and called the other persons of the vicinity. He also called the Sarpanch of the village and when he did not come, he left the appellant in the house of Phoolsingh and came back to his house, but the appellant fled away from the house of the victim. He immediately took her daughter to the hospital at Pali from where to Bilaspur. He lodged the report to the police after coming from Bilaspur. In cross-examination, he too has remained firm in saying that on the date of incident, the appellant entered into his house and assaulted the victim by axe on her neck, by which she received grievous injuries. He also duly identified the appellant and caught him hold at the time of incident and therefore, there is no question of any identification of the appellant. This witness can also be put to the sterling witness to the incident and nothing could be elicited from his evidence also to disbelieve him. 13. PW-1/Smt. Santoshi Tekam is the mother of the victim. She too has stated that on the date of incident, she woke up on the hue and cry of her mother-in-law and when they went to the room of the victim, they saw her injuries and her husband caught hold the appellant on the spot, who was having axe in his hand. Her daughter was being taken to hospital and they have lodged the report. She also remained firm in her cross-examination, that when she woke up, she saw the victim 8 in injured condition, the appellant was there having axe in his hand and her husband caught him hold on the spot and when her daughter regain her consciousness, she disclosed about the incident to her. She was being cross-examined that the mental condition of the appellant was not good, but she denied the same. 14. PW-4/Smt. Jagautin Bai, who is the grandmother of the victim has stated in her evidence that on the date of incident, when they were sleeping in their house, the appellant came to her house, broke open the door by the axe. She woke up from the noise of breaking the door and saw that the appellant running towards the room of the victim and assaulted the victim on her neck by the axe thrice. When she shouted, her son Ramlal came there and took the appellant away from the room, thereafter they called other persons of the vicinity. She too is the sterling witness and remained firm in saying that on the date of incident, the appellant broke open the door of her house and assaulted the victim by axe, by which she received the injuries. She also denied that at the time of incident, the appellant was not having the sound state of mind. 15. PW-5/Dilharan Jagat, PW-6/Pratap Singh Tekam, PW-7/Adinarayan Maravi, PW-8/Tulsingh Jagat, PW-9/Chaitram Gond and PW-10/Ajmer Singh Gond are the persons of the vicinity, who subsequently came there and they were being informed by the complainant and her family members about the incident and they have taken the victim to the hospital. In cross-examination of all these witnesses, the suggestion was put that at the time of incident the appellant was not having the sound mental state, but there is no 9 concrete evidence produced by the appellant that he was suffered by any mental illness at the time of incident. Though, there is some sort of evidence to that effect that his mental condition was dis-balanced, but they have not firmly said that under the such mental condition, he committed the offence. 16. PW-14/Dr. Vidya Bhushan, who is the medical officer at CIMS, Bilaspur, who treated her, has stated in his evidence that on 31.12.2019, at about 1:00 AM, the victim was admitted to CIMS, Bilaspur. He treated her stitched her wound on her neck. He found 03 injuries on her neck. In cross-examination, he stated that after treatment of 03 days, she was being discharged from the hospital. He reiterated that the victim had received 03 injuries on her neck. 17. PW-13/Dr. Anil Saraf has stated in his evidence that on 07.01.2020, he medically examined the victim and found the lacerated wound on her neck having pain and swelling on it. His report is Exhibit P-8. He also proved the query reports (exhibit P-9 and P-10). The bedhead ticket of Pali Hospital of the victim is Article A-1. In cross- examination, he stated that since there is no facility available in the Community Health Centre, Pali for treatment of grievous injuries, the victim was referred to CIMS, Bilaspur after her primary treatment there. 18. From the FSL report (exhibit P-39), the blood was found on the axe seized from the appellant and kurti and sweater of the victim, which is also a connecting link with the guilt of the appellant in the offence in question. 10 19. From all this evidence, the prosecution has unerringly proved by the prosecution that he committed trespass by night after preparation of assault and assaulted the victim by axe on her neck and thus the ingredients of the offence of Sections 458 and 307 of IPC are there and he has rightly been convicted by the learned trial Court. 20. In the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (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 Samuel 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 Micodotis, Director of Criminological Research Center, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education'. If 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 reculturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and the 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 11 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." 21. The appellant is appears to be aged about 55 years at present. Considering the defence taken by the appellant, his relations between the victim and her family members and further that the nature of injuries found on the body of the victim, this Court deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence awarded to the appellant form the offence of Sections 458 and 307 of IPC as there is no minimum sentence provided for the said offences. 22. For the foregoing reasons, while upholding the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Sections 458 and 307 of IPC, his sentence is reduced from R.I. for 07 years to R.I. for 04 years for both the offences. The fine sentence imposed upon the appellant for the offence of Sections 458 and 307 of IPC are maintained. Since, the appellant has already convicted and sentenced for the offence of under Section 307 of IPC, there is no need to convict and sentence him for the offence of Section 324 of IPC separately as the alleged act is already involved the commission of the offence of Section 307 of the IPC and thus, the separate conviction and sentence of the offence under Section 324 of IPC is set aside. 12 23. The appellant is reported to be in jail since 24.04.2024. He shall serve the entire sentence as awarded by this Court. The appellant is entitled for set-off of his undergone period during the trial as well as during the appeal. 24. With the aforesaid alteration/modification, the present appeal is partly allowed. 25. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail sentence to serve the same on the appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 26. Let a copy of this judgment and the original records be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved