1 2025:CGHC:24726 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 342 of 2017 Balveer Ekka S/o Shri Manohar Ekka Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Bhithwa, Thana And Tahsil- Seetapur, Civil And Revenue District.- Surguja, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Vijay Kumar Khalkho S/o Shri Jangali Ram Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Bhithwa, Thana And Tahsil- Seetapur, Civil And Revenue District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh 2 - Khilawan Kumar Khalkho, S/o Shri Jangali Ram Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Village- Bhithwa Thana And Tahsil- Seetapur, Tahsil - Seetapur, Civil And Revenue District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate Ambikapur, District- Surguna, Chhattisgarh. , District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 16 .06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No.3/State. 2. The instant criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 10.01.2017 passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja in Criminal Appeal No. 64/2015, whereby the appeal filed by the applicant against the judgment of acquittal dated 27.10.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sitapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.26/2014, whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 from the charges punishable under Sections 294, 325, 506 of IPC. 3. Prosecution story in brief is that on January 1, 2014, the complainant, Balveer, and others went on a picnic, where a photo session took place with the accused's sister present. Later, on February 5, 2014, the accused allegedly attacked Balveer at his home, armed with axes and fawdas, using abusive language and causing grievous injuries, including broken teeth. Balveer reported the incident to the police, who registered a case (Crime No. 24/2014) under Sections 294, 323, and 506 of the IPC. After receiving the medical report, the police added Section 325 (grievous hurt) and filed a charge sheet on February 20, 2014 and on basis of the material available on record learned JMFC framed 3 the charges under Sections 294, 506-B, 325 of IPC. and tried the case and after due process of trial passed the judgment by acquitting the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Being aggrieved by the same, applicant preferred criminal appeal before the appellate Court, which was dismissed, the learned appellate Court affirmed the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, the criminal revision. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned judgment is contrary to the material evidence available on record and learned trial Court discarded the evidence of the witnesses whose contention were clearly supported by the medical evidence and from perusal of the medical evidence it is a case of grievous injury to applicant including the fracture. He further submits that the learned trial Court not properly appreciated the evidence of prosecution witnesses, who have stated about the commission of serious offence by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and the version of injured is also supported with the eye witnesses. He also submits that from perusal fo the evidence of PW-6, Dr. A.K. Jayswal and from perusal of the MLC Report, Exhibit P-10, CT Scan Report P- 11, it is clear that the applicant received grievous hurt which is punishable for 7 years, therefore, the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is bad in law and liable to be set-aside. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, considered his rival submission and gone through the records appended with the criminal revision. 4 6. Learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent Nos.1 & 2/accused persons observing that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that first, the accused persons, on 05.02.2014, at 9:30 A.M. in Village Bhithua, Police Station Sitapur, District Sarguja used obscene language against the complainant, Balveer Ekka, in a public place, thereby causing annoyance to him and others who heard it, second, in furtherance of a common intention formed with co-accused to assault Balveer Ekka, voluntarily caused him grievous injuries by beating him with iron rods (Tangi) and fawdas and third, criminally intimidated Balveer Ekka by threatening to kill him, thereby causing him fear. Therefore, the trial Court has acquitted the respondent Nos.1 & 2 from the offenses alleged against them. 7. Taking into consideration the findings recorded by the trial Court in acquitting the respondent Nos.1 & 2/accused persons from the aforesaid offences, which is also affirmed by the appellate Court, I do not find any reason to allow the criminal revision. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil