1 CRA No. 355 of 2016 2025:CGHC:29069 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 355 of 2016 1 - Lalu @ Laxman Sahu (Died on 03/12/2018) 2 - Ranu @ Rohdi Sen S/o Late Ajay Sen Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Sanjay Nagar Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. , District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Isha Jajodia, PL Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board 30/06/2025 Heard. 1. In sessions Trial No. 221/2013, three accused persons Lalu @ Laxman Sahu (A1), Ranu @ Rohdi Sen (A2) and Omprakash Adhariya (A3) were tried and convicted and out of them, A1 & A2 have preferred this appeal. However, on account of death of A1, the appeal filed in his respect has been dismissed as abated by this Court vide order dated 16/06/2025. RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.07.01 17:41:41 +0530 2 CRA No. 355 of 2016 2. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C is against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29/02/2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 221/2013 by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) whereby the appellants been convicted under Section 392 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, with default stipulation. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the incident occurred on 04/09/2013 in the evening at about 4:30-5:00 Hours. On 03/09/2013 the complainant/driver and helper left Jindal Plant Raigarh after loading iron rod in a vehicle for KSK Akaltara in the night at 10:00 P.M. On the date of the incident they stopped the vehicle near Ginny Petrol Pump due to rain. At that point of time phone call of a person to whom that material was belong came. After some time vehicle owner came there and asked both the driver/helper as to why the stop there and also asked them to come to Dhaba (Hotel) for taking food on which they went along with the owner for taking the food. It is alleged that at about 5:00 P.M. at Banari near Mardhari the appellant came in their sold Platina Motorcycle and stopped the motorcycle in front of the vehicle Trailer. It is alleged that thereafter the appellant get into the trailer and started assaulting by hand and fist to the driver/helper. Further the appellants after threatening to kill the driver/helper, A2 took the knife from the cabin of the vehicle and put the knife on the person of the complainant whereas appellant Lalu @ Laxman removed the driver from the driving seat and after 3 CRA No. 355 of 2016 sitting on the driver seat took the vehicle towards Akaltara and at that time co-accused Omprakash was in his motorcycle in front of the trailer and thereby committed loot of iron rod which is in the tune of Rs.17,00,000/- Further according to prosecution when helper Suresh Giri saw his owner Basant Kumar Giri (Pw-7) near Roda Dhaba (Hotel) then he shouted on which Santosh Kumar Pandey (PW7) with the help of local people caught hold the alleged trailer and also co-accused Omprakash. Subsequently, PW9, Sanjit Giri lodged the FIR and the police after registering the FIR sent Sanjit Giri (PW9) and Suresh Kumar Giri (PW10) for medical treatment. During investigation, the alleged material has been seized and 161 statement of the witnesses have been recorded. Further after completion of the investigation the police has filed a charge sheet before the concerned Court. 4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined 10 witnesses in its support. Statement of the accused/appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein they have pleaded their innocence and false implication in the matter. 5. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 29/02/2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph two of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 4 CRA No. 355 of 2016 6. Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, learned counsel submits that the A2 has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are material contradiction in the statements of the witnesses. Therefore, the conviction of A2 is not sustainable. Alternatively, he submits that A2 was 22 years of age at the time of incident, which took place in 2016. He would submit that he has no criminal antecedents and he is on bail and never misused the liberty granted by this Court. Thus, A2 may be extended the Probation of Offenders Act. 7. Ms. Isha Jajodia, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the appellants and submits that the conviction of the appellants is well merited which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection. 9. Sanjit Kumar Giri (PW9) is the driver of the Vehicle. In his statement, he has categorically stated that about two years ago at Roda Dhaba, he was going to deliver angle and channel from Jindal Raigarh to the power company of Akaltara in the trailer of Basant Giri's CTS company. His helper Suresh Giri (PW10) was also with him in the vehicle. After crossing Janjgir, we stopped near Ginni Petrol Pump and from there we contacted the place where we had to deliver the said goods through mobile, then the person who was going to receive the goods told us to stop near Ginni Petrol Pump. At the same time, owner Basant Giri came 5 CRA No. 355 of 2016 there with his two-three companions in a Bolero vehicle and asked us why we have parked there, then we said that we have talked to the person to whom we have to deliver the goods. Seth Basant Giri asked them to have food at hotel and told them to come here. The appellants came on a motorcycle and stopped them. Subsequently, the appellants climbed on the trailer, thereafter, appellant- Laxman asked him to get off the seat and he also slapped him and thereafter both the accused persons came inside. Appellant -Ranu had pointed the knife (vegetable cutting knife) and appellant- Laxman was driving the trailer. When they reached to Dabha, then they started to shout ‘Bachao Bachao’ after seeing their owner Basant Giri who was standing near Bolero Car. Thereafter, helper jumped out the trailer and he forcibly put break of the trailer and the appellants were caught. 10. Similarly, Suresh Kumar Giri (PW10) has stated in his statement that on the date of incident, when they were going to deliver the loaded article, the appellants, on the way, stopped their trailer and after pointing the vegetable knife, appellant Laxman started to drive the trailer. Subsequently, when they saw their owner near Dabha (hotel), they shouted and he jumped out of the trailer and thereafter the appellants were caught. 11. From bare perusal of the statements of these witnesses, it is crystal clear that the appellants, with the intention of loot, stopped the trailer and took the possession over the trailer by pointing the vegetable knife towards the Complainant. Nothing has been brought on by the defence in their 6 CRA No. 355 of 2016 cross-examination. 12. Dr. R.S. Sidar (PW1) has medically examined the victim. He deposed that while examining the Sanjit (PW9), he found one lacerated wound size 1 X 2 X 2 mm. There were several contusions and redness were present over there. He also stated that while examining the Suresh (PW10), there was no external injuries over his body, he was only complaining about pain. Bare perusal of the medical examination report, it is crystal clear that the Complainant as well as Suresh (PW10) did not sustain any grievous injuries. The injuries were simple in nature. 13. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the nature of injuries sustained by the Complainant, I am of the opinion that the trial Court did not commit any illegality in convicting A2 under Section 392 of the IPC. 14. So far as, the sentence part is concerned, considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case, the manner in which the incident occurred, the fact that the incident took place around 12 years ago, A2 at the relevant time i.e. 22 years; he has no criminal antecedent; during pendency of this appeal he was on bail since 2016; and did not misuse the liberty granted to him, and keeping in view the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of George Pon Paul v. Kanagalet, (2009) 13 SCC 478 wherein considering the fact that fine amount has been deposited and paid to the victim as also the long passage of time, the accused was sentenced to the period already undergone, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served by sending A2 back to jail at 7 CRA No. 355 of 2016 this stage and the ends of justice would be served, if A2 is sentenced to the period already undergone by him i.e. 115 days. 15. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of A2 under Section 392 of IPC, his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him. It is reported that the fine amount has already been deposited. 16. A2 is reported to be on bail. His bail bonds is not discharged at this stage and the bonds shall remain operative for a period of six months in view of Section 481 of the BNSS. 17. The trial court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Rahul/Gowri