1 2025:CGHC:61554 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 786 of 2016 Gulab Singh S/o Late Kishunram, Aged About 33 Years R/o Gahiranavagaon - P. S. Deori, District - Balod Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Deori, District - Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Vidya Bhushan Soni appears on behalf of Shri B.P.Singh, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Sachidanand Yadav, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 17/12/2025 Heard. 1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.08.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balod Dist. Balod C.G. in Criminal Appeal No.9/2016 whereby the appeal of the applicant has been partly allowed and while altering the conviction under Sections 323/34 & 32534 IPC to Sections 323 & 325 IPC, affirmed the sentence of RI for 6 months and RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.1,000/- under each count and in default thereof, further RI for one month each as imposed by the J.M.F.C. Dondilohara, Dist. Balod, vide judgment dated 20.01.2016 passed in Criminal Case No.245/2014. Having Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2025.12.17 17:18:12 +0530 2 convicted and sentenced the applicant as such with all sentences to run concurrently, the trial Court acquitted Kumari Bai of the charge under Sections 323/34 & 325/34 IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.09.2014 at 10.00 am when the complainant/injured – Kunwariya Bai and her husband Uday Ram were working in their agricultural field, then at the same time, the accused Gulab Singh with his wife Kumari Bai came there and quarrelled with them and during such quarrel, applicant/accused abused them and threatened them and also assaulted Uday Ram with stick and caused him to down and also caused simple injuries to Kunwaria Bai. On account of such assault by the applicant, Uday Ram sustained grievous injuries including fracture on his left leg and hand. On report being lodged to the above effect, F.I.R. (Ex.P.14) has been registered against the applicant and his wife. The injured witnesses were medically examined by Dr. N.P.Jangde (P.W.9) and Dr.Runa Singh (P.W.10). Bamboo stick was seized vide Ex.P.1. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicants before the J.M.F.C. Dondilohara, Dist. Balod. The applicant and his wife abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. 4. The Court of JMFC, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted the applicant – Gulab Singh while acquitting the co-accused Kumari Bai under such sections. The appellate Court, vide its judgment dated 16.08.2016 modified the judgment of the trial Court as mentioned in Para 1 of this order. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to challenge this revision on conviction part of the applicant but confines his argument to the sentence part only, which according to him, is on 3 higher side. He further submits that the applicant is a villager and he was in jail for 17 days, i.e., from 22.09.2014 to 26.09.2014 during trial and from 16.08.2016 to 26.08.2016 and is facing lis since September, 2014, i.e., for more than 11 years and that, he has no criminal antecedents and fine amount has already been deposited. On these premises, it is urged by him that the jail sentence awarded to the applicant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 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 injured witness PW-2 Uday Ram supported by the statement of P.W.1 Kunwaria Bai and medical evidence of P.W.9 Dr. N.P.Jangde and P.W.10 Dr. Runa Singh as well as other evidence and material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court as well as the Appellate Court being based on the evidence available on record is a correct finding and 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 that the applicant was in jail for 17 days, he is facing the lis since September, 2014 i.e. for more than 11 years and there is no criminal antecedents against him, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the applicant, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 10. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed. While maintaining 4 conviction of the applicant under the aforesaid Sections, the sentence imposed thereunder by the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court is hereby modified and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. However, the direction to run sentences concurrently and fine sentence are affirmed. 11. It is reported that the applicant is on bail. His bail bonds shall not be discharged at this stage and the same shall remain operative for a further period of six months in light of Section 481 of B.N.S.S. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani