1 2025:CGHC:19171 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 246 of 2016 1 - Mayaram S/o Sakharam Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 2 - Manoj Kumar S/o Chiniram Chelak Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dilwale @ Algu S/o Dindayal Jangre Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 4 - Prabhu Navrange S/o Bisahu Navrange Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 5 - Khopchand Satnami S/o Ganga Das Satnami Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 6 - Chetanlal S/o Kanahiya Lal Ghritlahare Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 7 - Sitaram S/o Asharam Janngre Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 8 - Punitram S/o Firanta Ram Tandon Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 9 - Gangaram S/o Firanta Ram Tandon Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 10 - Rekhuram S/o Atmaram Tandon Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 11 - Malikram S/o Ramsingh Jangre Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 12 - Namdas Ratre S/o Sukaluram Ratre Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 13 - Mungelal Tandon S/o Duklha Tandon Aged About 63 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 2 14 - Mannu Mandle S/o Budharu Mandle Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 15 - Dharmu Satnami S/o Vishram Satnami Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 16 - Anjor Satnami S/o Firanta Satnami Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 17 - Narottam Jangre S/o Asharam Jangre Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 18 - Genduram S/o Ramsingh Jangre Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 19 - Santu @ Santkumar S/o Ramsingh Jangre Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 20 - Harishankar Jangre S/o Narotam Jangre Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 21 - Dani @ Vishnu S/o Narottam Jangre Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata, Chowki Gidhpuri, Thana Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Palari, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellants : Mr. N.K. Malaviya, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Rishabh Singh Deo, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Judgment on Board (28.04.2025) 1. This appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.01.2016 by the Sessions Judge, Balodabazar- Bhatapara District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh in 3 S.T. No. 46/2013, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code Rigorous Imprisonment for 06-06 months and fine of Rs. 100/- - Rs. 100/- and in default of fine amount 01-01 month Simple Imprisonment. Under Section 458 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code Rigorous Imprisonment for 02-02 years and fine amount of Rs. 100/- -Rs. 100/- and in default of fine amount additional Simple Imprisonment for 01-01 month. Both the sentences will run concurrently for each appellant. 2. The case in nutshell is that as per the allegations, complainant lodged an FIR at Thana Palari, that in the election of the Sarpanch of the Village at Dhaurabhata, he was one of the candidate and Harishankar Jangr was opponent to him, in the same election both got equal votes, thereafter toss was held and Derha won. Due to this defeat and rivalry, on 28.02.2010 at about 10:30 PM when he was sleeping after taking supper Harishankar with his followers that is the appellants herein, went in front of the house of Derha and abused him in filthy language, braked the doors, entered in the house and assaulted Derha and his wife namely Champa bai and thereafter also assaulted Pun Kumar whose house is near to Derha. Therefore an offence was registered against the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 294, 506(Part-II) , 451, 148, 323 read with section 149(four times), 4 427 and 458 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. After the incident, parties compromised with each other and filed an application under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court and thereafter acquitted the accused persons on the basis of compromise under Section 294, 506 (Part-II) of the Indian Penal Code on 31.07.2013. The trial commenced only with regard to Section 148 and 458 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code which are non- compoundable offence. 4. Prior to this incident, Derha and others assaulted the Sant Ram and Gendu and others therefore, a counter case was also registered at the same Police Station that is Palari as Crime no. 78/ 2010 for the offences punishable under Section 294, 506(B), 323/34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and it was commenced under Section 323 of the Cr.P.C. on 05.03.2011 to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as Sessions Trial No. 52/13 and it was decided along with the same case. 5. To prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses. Statements of the appellants under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein accused/appellants have pleaded their innocence and 5 false implication in the matter. After completion of trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned in para one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the impugned judgment is bad in law, perverse and is liable to be set aside. He stated that the learned trial court has ignored the facts that it is a false implication by the Police because there are no independent witnesses of the incident hence the whole prosecution story is doubtful but the learned trial court has erroneously believed and appreciated the depositions of prosecution witnesses Punkumar PW-05, Punni Bai PW-04 and Hem Lal PW-03 and Nain Das PW-06 and has erroneously reached on the conclusion that the appellants were guilty and convicted the appellants for the offences aforementioned. Hence he prays to quash/set aside the impugned judgment. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellants and supported the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court by stating that the learned trial court after making due diligence has passed the judgment, therefore, there is no need of interference. 6 8. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused entire evidence adduced by the complainant and gone through the evidence available on record with utmost circumspection. 9. PW-06 Nain Das in his deposition has deposed that he know the appellants as they live in their village. Three years ago at about 10PM when he was sleeping in his house, at that relevant point of time all the appellants came near the house and started using filthy languages, threw stones and with the stick broke the door of the house. Upon entering the house accused him, that he has not given vote. On seeing this he ran jumped into the house of one Punnibai . The appellants saw him entering into the house of Punnibai started chasing him and entered in the house of Punnibai and broke the door of the house of Punnibai also. All the appellants assaulted him. 10. The deposition of Nain Das was supported by PW-03 Hemlal@ Hemu. He deposed that on the day of incident he was in his home sleeping when he heard the voice that some one is abusing. When he went out to see what is happening, he saw that his brother PW-06 was beaten by the appellants. 11. However, considering the statements of complainant and other witnesses, it is crystal clear that the appellants entered the 7 house of the complainant, broke the door and when the complainant ran towards the house of Nainbai, grabbed him and assaulted him. The whole incident took place only on the allegation made by the appellants that the complainant did not voted for them. Hence the offence punishable under Section 148 and 458 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. 12. So far the sentence part is concerned. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, age of the appellants at the time of commission of the offence and particularly the appellants are facing lis from last 15 years, they were in jail for almost twenty days. Prior to this incident, Derha and others assaulted the Sant Ram and Gendu and others therefore, a counter case was also registered at the same Police Station that is Palari as Crime no. 78/ 2010 for the offences punishable under Section 294, 506(B), 323/34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and it was commenced under Section 323 of the Cr.P.C. on 05.03.2011 to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as Sessions Trial No. 52/13 and it was decided along with the same case. After the incident, parties compromised with each other for the offence punishable under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. Section 294, 506 (Part-II) of the Indian Penal Code on 31.07.2013. due to the said 8 compromise the trial commenced only with regard to Section 148 and 458 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, I am of the view that the end of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the appellants, the jail sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. 13. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellants under Section 148 and 458 read with Section 149 of the IPC is affirmed and against the conviction they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. 14. It is reported that the appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are not discharged at this stage and the same shall remain operative for a further period of six months in light of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C. 15. Records of the trial court be sent back along with a copy of this order forthwith for information and necessary compliance. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza