1 2025:CGHC:36659 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1140 of 2024 P. Pramila Rao W/o P. Ram Chandra Rao Aged About 32 Years R/o Balco Sector - 5 Quarter No. 101 / A, Police Station - Balco Nagar District - Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Balco Nagar, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For the appellant : Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 28/07/2025 1. The present criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.04.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge Korba, District Korba in Sessions Case No. 09/2022 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.08.01 10:31:38 +0530 2 under: Conviction : Sentence U/s 304 (Part-2) of IPC RI for 7 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional RI for 1 month. 2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.09.2021, at about 10.55 am the appellant caused death of her son Satvik, aged about 03 years by lifting him upside down and by hitting him on the floor several times. The allegation against the appellant is that her son Sai Satvik asked her to give milk, due to which, the appellant became annoyed and dashed the head of child against the floor, as a result of which, blood was oozing from the mouth, nose and ear of the child Sai Satvik and he was taken to hospital for treatment where the child was declared dead. Initially merg intimation given by Hospital Ward Boy P.W.7 Shivlal and during investigation, memorandum of the accused appellant was recorded and on that basis, the offence u/s 302 IPC was registered against her. After completing the investigation and other procedural requirements, the charge sheet was filed. 3. The prosecution has in all examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 20 documents to prove its case. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC wherein she pleaded innocence and false implication. After conclusion of trial and considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material available on record, learned Trial Court by impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his 3 argument only to sentence part. He also submits that out of the maximum jail sentence of 7 years imposed on her u/s 304 (Part-2) of IPC for causing death of child Satvik, she had already remained in jail for about 3 years, 10 months and 5 days. He submits that the incident took place in a spur of moment way back in the year 2021 and since then the appellant is facing the lis and there are no criminal antecedents reported against her. Hence, it is prayed that the sentence of the appellant under section 304 (Part 2) IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by her in the interest of justice. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 7. Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of witnesses especially P.W.1 Praneet Kumar (son of appellant), P.W.2 Ramchandra Rao husband of appellant and other relative witnesses P.W.5 Ratnamma & P.W.6 Sunhbhamma and the evidence of P.W.13 Dr. Ravikant Singh, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 304 (Part-2) of IPC and it is hereby affirmed. 4 8. As regards the sentence of Appellant considering the facts that the incident had taken place in spur of moment about 4 years ago and the maximum jail sentence awarded to her is RI for 7 years u/s 304 (Part-2) IPC IPC, out of which, as stated by learned counsel she had already completed the jail sentence of 3 years, 10 months and 5 days and is facing the lis since 2021 and further looking to her present age as also considering the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against her, in the interest of justice and in the considered opinion of this Court, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence of the appellant from 7 years R.I. to the period already undergone by her. It is ordered accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove. 10. Appellant is in jail. She be released from jail forthwith in case she is not required in any other offence. 11. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court and the concerned Jail Superintendent forthwith for information and necessary action. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao