1 2025:CGHC:22873 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 908 of 2025 Vinod @ Golu S/o Lav Kumar Aged About 21 Years Caste Korwa, R/o Village - Suwarpara, P.S. Batauli, District- Sarguja Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Batauli, District- Sarguja (C.G.). ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 10/06/2025 1 The present appeal has been filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS, 2023 against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.04.2025 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District - Sarguja (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No. 145/2023 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under : Conviction Sentence U/s 326 of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 2 years BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.06.12 18:35:53 +0530 2 with fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 1 month. 2 The prosecution's case, in brief, is that on 11.08.2023, a dispute arose between the appellant and the injured, Santoshi, due to a previous enmity. It is alleged that the appellant used filthy language, threatened and assaulted by means of scissors and caused injuries to Santoshi. On the basis of the complaint, FIR was registered and after completion of investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant. 3 So as to hold the appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses and exhibited 23 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. 4 After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.04.2025, learned trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506 Part-II & 307 of IPC. However, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal. 5 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing the appeal 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 on 11.08.2023 and the appellant is in jail since 16.08.2023 i.e. about 1 year 9 months and 25 days. The appellant is now aged about 23 years and he is still serving the jail sentence; therefore, in the interest of 3 justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him and he may be released from jail. 6 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for appellant. 7 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8 Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of the complainant Sukhsay Korwa (PW-1), the injured Santoshi Banwasi (PW-2) and also witnesses Tiharo (PW-3), Dr. Ganesh Ram Bek (PW-5) and Savita Banwasi (PW-6), establish the involvement of the appellant in the crime in 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 326 of IPC. 9 As regards sentence, keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 2 years out of which he has already served the jail sentence of 1 year, 9 months and 25 days and at present the appellant is aged about 23 years, he has no criminal antecedent, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. 10 Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 326 of IPC, his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. 1 year, 9 months and 25 days. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant by the Trial Court shall remain intact. 4 11 The appellant is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case. 12 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 Khatai