1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 879 of 2016 1 - Tuntun Rai S/o Ramvilas Rai Aged About 25 Years R/o Almanpur, District Vaishali Bihar, 2 - Anjan Shukla @ Munna Scorpio @ Doctor S/o Naval Kishore Shukla Aged About 38 Years R/o Agarpur, Police Station Lalganj, District Vaishali Bihar, ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Shri Raj Kumar Pali, Adviocate. For Non-applicant/State : Shri H.A.P.S. Bhatia, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 18/09/2025 1. This criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.06.2016 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh C.G. in Criminal Appeal No.202000000752016 whereby the appellate Court dismissed the appeal while affirming the judgment dated 16.05.2016 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Dharamjaigarh, Dist. Raigarh in Criminal Case No.496/2014 convicting the applicants under Section 379/34 of IPC and sentencing them to RI for two years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, further RI for one month each. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 30.07.2014, the applicants along with other co-accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed theft of Bolero Vehicle bearing registration No.CG-13-C/5646 owned by one Gurpreet, sister-in-law of the complainant Kanwaljeet Singh, who lodged the report Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2025.09.18 17:21:30 +0530 2 at Police Station Dharamjaigarh where F.I.R. was registered against the unknown persons under Crime No. 254/14. During investigation, one of the co-accused persons Kamlesh Giri was apprehended and on the basis of memorandum statements of the applicants, the said vehicle was recovered vide Ex.P.2 and all the accused persons including the present applicants were arrested. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court of J.M.F.C.Dharamjaigarh. The applicants and other co-accused persons abjured their charge and pleaded non-guilty. 4. Learned court of JMFC, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused persons including the applicants, which was affirmed by the learned appellate Court, as mentioned in para 1. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction part of the applicants and confines his argument to the sentence part only, which according to him is on higher side. He further submits that the applicants remained in jail for one year eight months and nineteen days, i.e., from 22.08.2014 to16.05.2016 and are facing lis since 2014, i.e., more than 11 years. He further submits that during trial both the applicants were on bail and they never misused the liberty granted to them. Therefore, it is prayed by counsel for the applicants that the jail sentence awarded to applicants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the revision and supported the impugned judgment. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 8. Considering the statement of P.W.1 Kanwaljeet Singh supported by the statements of P.W.3 Gagandeep Singh, P.W.4 Kishore Chand, P.W.6 M.J.Firdhoshi, Sub-Inspector, P.W.7 G.P.Banjare, Sub-Inspector and P.W.8 K.D.Singh, Inspector 3 and other evidence and material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding recorded by the Court of JMFC Court as well as by the Appellate Court, being based on the evidence available on record, is a correct finding. Therefore, I hereby affirm the said finding of conviction of applicant. 9. As regards the sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the overall evidence on record, the fact that the applicants remained in jail for a period of one year eight months and nineteen days and that they are facing the lis from 2014 i.e. more than 11 years and further that during bail period they never misused the liberty, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon applicants, the jail sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, the fine amount with default sentence imposed by the Court of JMFC as well as Appellate Court for the aforesaid offence shall remain intact. 10. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction of applicants under the aforementioned Sections is affirmed and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. 11. Since the applicants are reported to be on bail, therefore, their bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision of Section 481 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Samhita, 2023. Sd/- (RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) JUDGE Anjani