1 2025:CGHC:11552 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 1091 of 2024 1 - Kewra Verma S/o Dhanajay Verma Aged About 33 Years. 2 - Bhuneshwar Sahu S/o Late Sukhdev Prasad Sahu Aged About 40 Years. Both are R/o Village - Chirra, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh ( C.G.). ... Appellants(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh ( C.G.).. ---- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellants : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Prabha Sharma, PL. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 07.03.2025 1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2024, passed by learned Special Sessions Judge, Atrocities, Raigarh, (CG) in Special Criminal Case under Atrocities Act No.16/2023, whereby the appellants stand convicted and sentence as under: 2 Conviction Sentence Under Section 341 of IPC Fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine, 15 days additional Simple Imprisonment. Under Section 294 of IPC Fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine 15 days additional SI. s 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is this that on 23.01.2023, appellants/accused have abused the complainant/victim (Sadhya Bai Khatkar) in the name of her caste, used filthy language and also threatened to kill. Based upon report, FIR was registered against the appellants for offence under Sections 294, 341 read with Section 34 of IPC. 3. On completion of investigation, challan/charge-sheet was filed and based upon which, learned Court below has framed the charges against the appellant. 4. Prosecution in order to prove its case examined total 12 witnesses, however, appellants have not examined any witness in their defence. Statement of appellants (accused) were also recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which they denied all incriminating evidence appearing against them, pleaded innocence and false implication. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record, the trial Court vide impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant in the 3 manner as described in Para-1 of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the evidence available on record as the Court below has failed to appreciate the evidence of prosecution in its true perspective. There are many contradiction and omission in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Prosecution did not examine the independent witnesses and only examined the interested witnesses as eye- witnesses of this case are relative of the victim. As such, the impugned judgment of conviction recorded and sentence awarded deserves to be set-aside. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supporting the impugned judgment and submits that there are specific evidence/material available on record which shows that appellants have committed the said offence. Being so, the impugned judgment is strictly in accordance with law and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the recorded placed on record. 9. PW-1/complainant-victim in her evidence has stated thus: “2. मैं ्ቇाम पंचायत छिበኋा की सበኋपंच हूं। इसी साल जनवበኋी 2023 में हमाበኋे गांव के खेलभाठा मैदान में ቅኌ#के ट मैच का शुभाበኋंभ था जहां ቅኌवधायक महोदय आए थे तब मैं वहां अपने पतित के साथ मोटበኋ सायቅኌकल से गई थी। लगभग 12 बजे खेल 4 खत्म होने के बाद मैं वापस आ በኋही थी तभी या्ቔी ्ቚतित्ቌालय के पास पहुंचे थे तभी पंच भुवने्ቫበኋ साहू एवं के वበኋा बाई ቅኌमले औበኋ हम लोगों को በኋोककበኋ मेበኋे साथ गाली- गलौच कበኋने लगे औበኋ कहे ቅኌक तुम चमरिበኋन को सበኋपंच बना ቅኌदए है तो बहुत तप በኋही हो औበኋ गाली- गलौच कበኋने लगे। इसके पूव भी आበኋोपगण मेበኋे साथ गाली- गलौच कበኋते በኋहे है। मुझे एवं मेበኋे पतित को आበኋोपीगण गाली- गलौच कበኋते हुए जान से माበኋने की धमकी ቅኌदए।" 10. PW-2/Manharan Lal Khatkar (husband of victim) in his evidence has stated thus: “1. घटना ቅኌदनांक 23-1-2023 की है। घटना ቅኌदनांक को हमाበኋे ्ቇाम में खेलभाठा मैदान में ቅኌ#के ट मैच का काय #म था जिजसमें ቅኌवधायक महोदय आए थे इसलिलए उस काय #म में शाቅኌमल होने के लिलए मैं अपनी पत्नी के साथ खेलभाठा मैदान गया था। 2. लगभग ቅኌदन के बाበኋह बजे काय #म समा्቎ होने अपनी पत्नी को मोटበኋ सायकल में बैठाकበኋ घበኋ वापस जा በኋहा था तभी मुख्य माग में बने या्ቔी ्ቚतित्ቌालय के पास आበኋोपीगण ቅኌमले जो በኋास्ता በኋोककበኋ खड़े थे औበኋ मुझे सड़क पበኋ जाने से अवरू्ቍ हुआ। अछिभयु्ሹगण मां- बहन की गाली देते हुए मेበኋे पत्नी को चमरिበኋन बोल በኋहे थे तथा माበኋने का भी ्ቚयास ቅኌकए। तब मैं, अमृत औበኋ सुशील ने मेበኋी पत्नी को माበኋने से बीच- बचाव ቅኌकए। उसके बाद हम लोग घበኋ जाकበኋ थाने में रिበኋपोट दज कበኋाए।" 11. From the aforementioned evidence, it is clear that on the date of alleged incident ie 23.01.2023, appellants/accused have abused the complainant/victim (Sadhya Bai Khatkar) in the name of her caste, used filthy language and also threatened to kill. The evidence of these witnesses are also supported by eye- witnesses (PW-3/Sushil Sahu, PW-4/Amrit Lal). 12. In view of of above, prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against appellants, hence, this Court is the 5 opinion that the trial Court has not committed any mistake in arriving at a conclusion that appellants are guilty for offence punishable under Sections 341 and 294 of IPC. 13. Accordingly, appeal is hereby dismissed. However, it is made clear that the conviction of the appellants will not affect their career in any manner. 14. Record of case be sent back forthwith with a copy of this order for information and necessary action. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE J/-