1 2025:CGHC:29691 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1604 of 2024 1 - Banau Ram Pahadi Korwa S/o Maniram Pahadi Korwa Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Sarhidih, Police Chowki Rajgamar, Police Station Balco Nagar Korba, District Korba (C.G.). ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balco, District Korba (C.G.). ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 02/07/2025 1 The present appeal under Section 415(3) BNSS, 2023 has been filed challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.08.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Korba, District-Korba (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.50/2022 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under : Conviction Sentence U/s 304 Part-II of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 3 months. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.07.04 17:46:17 +0530 2 2 The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 02.02.2022 at about 7:45 O’clock complainant rupesh Kashyap Ward Boy CIMS Hospital Bilaspur lodged a Merg intimation to the concerned police chowki to this effect that Shanti Bai W/o Banau Ram Pahadi Korwa, aged about 35 years died due to fall down from height. On the basis of such information concerned police chowki has registered Merg No. 0/2022 and dead body panchnama was prepared. During the course of investigation, statements of mother of deceased Guruwari Bai, Krishna Pahadi Korwa, Santu Ram Pahadi Korwa, Sukhi Ram Pahdi Korwa, Dilesh Ram and Chamaru Singh were recorded. In the statements it came to know that on the date of incident i.e. 30.01.2022 in the evening at about 5:00 pm the deceased Shanti Bai came in the house of Krishna Pahadi Korwa shouting as save me and entered into the house of Krishna Pahadi Korwa followed by her husband/appellant who was carrying a stick with him and attacked upon the head of the deceased, due to which the deceased fall down and was unconscious. Thereafter, the appellant took his wife to the hospital for her treatment wherein she died. After due investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant. 3 So as to hold the appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited 24 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 The trial Court, taking into consideration the evidences which have come on record, vide impugned judgment dated 03.08.2024 acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC, however the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned 3 in paragraph-1 of this judgment leading to the filing of this 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 appellant is in jail since 22.03.2022, the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 5 years, out of which the appellant has already served the jail sentence of 3 years, 3 months and 10 days. There is no criminal antecedent of the appellant and as per the statement of Krishna Korwa (PW- 1) the appellant has 6 children and except the appellant and deceased there are no family member to look after them. Hence, considering all theses facts, the sentence imposed upon the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 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 Krishna Korwa (PW-1), Guruwari Bai (PW-3), Om Prakash Parihar (PW-5), Rupesh Kumar Kashyap (PW-6), Shailendra Singh Rawat (PW-7), Dr. Ganendra Kumar (PW-10), Dr. M.L. Bhariya (PW-11) and Suresh Kumar Jogi (PW-12), the involvement of the appellant in the crime in question is clearly established. This Court does not find any illegality in the findings recorded by the Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II of IPC. 4 9 As regards sentence, in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin v. 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 Samual 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 Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' 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 re- culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and 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.” 5 10 In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the appellant is in jail since 22.03.2022, the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 5 years, out of which he has already served the jail sentence of 3 years, 3 months & 10 days, no criminal antecedent of the appellant is recorded in the arrest memo, he has studied upto 5th class and works as a labour and also considering the fact that as per the statement of Krishna Korwa (PW-1), the appellant and the deceased have 6 children and there is no family member to look after them, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. 11 Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant under Section 304 Part-II of IPC is maintained but his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. 3 years, 3 months and 10 days. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant by the Trial Court shall remain intact. 12 Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated herein-above. 13 The appellant is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case. 14 Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. A copy of the judgment may also be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent wherein the appellant is suffering the jail sentence. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE H.L. Sahu