1 2025:CGHC:13200 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 813 of 2016 1 - Kishore Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Munuram Gupta Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Bijana, P.S. Tamnar, Distt. Raigarh, Civil And Rev. Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tamnar District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. C. S. Deo along with Ms. Isha Jajodia, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 19/03/2025 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (for short the Cr.P.C.) against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 17.06.2016, passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (C.G.) in Sessions Case No. 52/2014, whereby the the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced for RI for 02 years with fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine additional RI for 01 months. 2 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.03.2011 the complainant Loknath PW-5 lodged a report to the police that there exist a property dispute between him and his other family members, on the issue of their property dispute on 27.03.2011 at about 07:00 a.m. his younger brother Dashrath called village meeting. In the meeting when the negotiations were going on, his cousin brother Kishore came there along with the Kuber and assaulted his younger brother Dashrath by lathi and gave threatening with dire consequence they abused also. By the assault made by the accused persons, he received injuries on his head and hand by which the bone of right hand was fractured. When the complainant intervened he too have been assaulted by the appellant Kishore. The other persons appeared in the meeting namely Kurmat, Teerath and Sundarlal Patel intervened in the quarrel. On the report made by the complainant FIR Ex.P/6 was registered against the accused persons for the offence under Section 294, 506, 323, 325/34 of IPC. The injured Loknath and Dashrath were sent for their medical examination to Community Health Centre, Tamnar and they have been medically examined by PW-3 Dr. Dharam Sai Paikra who gave his report Ex.P/2 and Ex.P/3. During the medical examination of the injured Loknath, he found one cut wound over occipital region, 1x1/2x1/2 cm which was simple in nature. While examining the injured Dashrath, the doctor noticed swelling on middle part of right forearm and he was referred to KGH Hospital Raigarh and for x-ray examination and further treatment. When the injured Dashrath was radiologically examined, his lower 1/3 on right forearm bone was found fractured and the doctor PW-3 Dharam Sai Paikra gave his x-ray report Ex.P/4. 3. The spot map Ex.P/7 was prepared by the police the accused persons have been arrested on 18.04.2011. During the investigation one thick wooden club has been seized from the spot vide seizure memo Ex.P/1. 3 4. Statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. have been recorded and after completion of usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the two accused persons i.e. Kishore Kumar Gupta and Kuber Gupta before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gharghoda, District Raipur for the offence under Section 294, 506, 323, 325/34 of IPC. The case was committed to the Learned Sessions Judge, Raigarh, from where the same has been transferred to the learned trial Court for its trial. 5. The learned trial Court has framed charge against the accused persons for the offence under Sections 294, 506-B, 323/34 and 325 of I.P.C. The accused persons denied the charge and claimed trial. 6. In order to prove the charge against the accused persons, the prosecution has examined as many as 7 witnesses. The statement of the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. have also been recorded in which they denied the circumstance appears against them, plead innocence and have submitted that they have been falsely implicated in the offence. 7. Two defence witnesses Hemsagar DW-1 and Tejram DW-2 have been examined by the accused persons. 8. After appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties, the learned trial Court has acquitted the co-accused Kuber Kumar Gupta from all the offence, the appellant has been acquitted from the offence under Section 294, 506-B and 323/34 of IPC but convicted for the offence under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent has has been falsely implicated in the offence. He would further submits that he is not challenging the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Section 325 of IPC but is challenging the sentence awarded to him. The appellant is remained in jail for about 20 days. The offence of Section 325 of IPC does not provide any minimum sentence the parties are closely related 4 and presently their relations became cordial. The quarrel ensured in a heat of passion that too in the meeting convened for negotiations of the dispute between the parties and there was no intentionally assault to the injured. The incident is of the year 2011 and presently appellant is aged about 56 years having innumerable responsibilities of his family, therefore, his undergone period may be considered to be sufficient sentence for the offence under Section 325 of IPC by enhancing fine amount suitable. 10. On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposes and have submitted that after adverting the entire evidence available on record the learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant for the alleged offence. The learned trial Court has shown his leniency by awarding less sentence and there is no scope for awarding the sentence for the period already undergone by the appellant. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is absolutely justified and needs no interference. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. Although, the appellant is not challenging the conviction for the offence under Section 325 of IPC yet it deem it necessary for this Court to consider the evidence available on record. 13. PW-5, Loknath and PW-6 Dashrath are the injured persons in the case. Both these witnesses have duly supported the prosecution case that with respect to the property dispute between the parties, a village meeting was convened and during the village meeting quarrel took place and the appellant Kishore has assaulted the injured Dashrath by lathi by which he received injuries on his right hand including fracture of bone. Their evidence with respect to the involvement of the appellant for the offence in question is remain intact in their cross-examination. Further the injuries found on the body of the injured persons have been proved by PW-3 who medically examined them and proved their injury report Ex.P/2 and Ex.P/3 as well as x-ray report Ex.P/4. 5 Therefore, there is no iota of any doubt that the appellant caused injuries to the injured Dashrath PW-6 and thus the involvement of the appellant in the offence in question has been duly proved by the prosecution. 14. So far as the sentence part is concerned in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (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 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.” 15. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is presently aged about 56 years. The offence is of the year 2011 the parties are close relative and in the meeting related to their property 6 dispute. The quarrel took place. The relation between the parties are became cordial. The appellant is having innumerable responsibilities of his family and already suffered the criminal lis for about 14 years, therefore, this Court is of the opinion the ends of justice would meet if the period of sentence awarded to the appellant is to be reduced for the period already undergone by him by enhancing the fine amount. Therefore, while maintaining the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Section 325 of IPC his jail sentence is reduced for the period already undergone by him with fine of Rs. 25,000/- the fine amount shall be paid by the appellant within 3 months from today, failing which the appellant shall undergo the additional RI for 1 month. On being so deposited the fine amount by the appellant Rs. 23,000/- shall be paid to the injured Dashrath PW-6 as compensation as provided under Section 395 of BNSS, 2023. 16. With the aforesaid alteration/modification in the sentence, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is reported to be on bail. His bail bond shall continue for further period of 6 months as provided under Section 481 of BNSS, 2023. 17. The trial Court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.04.28 19:56:43 +0530