1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1162 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Darro s/o. Fagu Ram Darro,Aged about 30 years, R/o Puttarvahi, PS – Bhanupratappur, District – North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Korer, District – North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Priyanka Bajpai appears on behalf of Smt. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Hrishikesh Sharma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Judgment on Board 14/05/2026 Heard. 1. The present appeal filed under Section 415 (2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the B.N.S.S. 2023) is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.04.2025 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Kanker, North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.18/2020 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: CONVICTION SENTENCE Under Section 304-A of IPC (two times) R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.100/- and in default thereof, additional R.I. for 10 days each. Under Section 337 of IPC (four times) R.I. for 6 months with fine of Rs.100/- and in default thereof, additional R.I. for 10 days each. Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.05.14 17:32:56 +0530 2 Under Section 338 of IPC (two times) R.I. for 1 years with fine of Rs.100/- and in default thereof, additional R.I. for 10 days each. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.12.2019 at about 5:00 pm, the appellant was alleged to have driven Bolero vehicle bearing registration No.C.G.-19-C-0911 (for short, the offending vehicle) in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the stationary Metador vehicle bearing registration No.C.G.-27-B-7528 and thereby caused accident, on account of which, Daneshwar and Hina, who were present in the said offending vehicle have died. On a report being lodged to the above effect by the complainant Shailesh Kumar Usare (P.W.2), offence under Sections 279, 337 & 304 of IPC under Crime No.74/2019 has been registered at Police Station Korer, District Kanker against the appellant. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kanker against the appellant. After committal of the case to the Sessions Court, the trial Court has framed charges against the appellant under Section 304, 308 of IPC. 4. The appellant denied his guilt and pleaded his innocence and false implication. 5. The trial Court, after completion of trial and upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, by its impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment against which this appeal has been preferred by him under Section 415 (2) of B.N.S.S. 2023. 3 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that she does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellant under the aforesaid sections and confined her argument to quantum of sentence, which, according to her, is on higher side. She further submits that the appellant is in jail from 23.03.2020 to to 23.06.2020 and again from the date of judgment, i.e., 23.04.2025 till date, i.e. 14.05.2026, thus, he has been incarcerating the jail sentence for a period of one year, three months and twenty days, he has no criminal antecedents and that, he is facing the lis since 2019, i.e., for more than 6 years. She placed her reliance upon a judgment rendered in the case of Rajkumar Sao vs. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine Chh 7924 wherein sentence was reduced to the period already undergone by the applicant. On these premises, she urged that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 7. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposes the appeal and supports the impugned judgment. 8. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 9. Considering the statement of complainant PW-2 Shailesh Kumar Usare supported by the evidence of P.W.3 Smt. Sangita, P.W.4 Garima Usare, P.W.5 Savita Uike, P.W.6 Meena Usare, P.W.8 Ravi Kumar Usare and P.W.21 Domendra Kumar, Investigating Officer coupled with the medical evidence of P.W.11 Dr. Ashutosh Gangrale, P.W.12 Dr. Nakul Utpal and P.W.13 Dr. Dilip Kumar Santupathi, who proved the post- mortem report (Exs.P.20 & 21), Bedhead ticket and treatment 4 documents (Ex.P.22 & Ex.P.29 to Ex.P.29 E) and M.L.C. reports (Ex.P.23 to 28) and the other evidence and material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding of conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge being based on the evidence available on record is a correct finding and I hereby affirm the said finding. 10. As regards the sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the appellant is in jail for a period of one year, three months and twenty days, facing the lis since 2019 i.e. for more than 6 years, there are no criminal antecedents against him, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the appellant, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 11. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining conviction of the appellant under aforesaid Sections, the sentence imposed thereunder by the Sessions Court is hereby modified and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. However, the fine sentence and default sentence is affirmed. All the sentences shall run concurrently. 12. It is reported that the appellant is in jail. Accordingly, It is directed that the appellant be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. 13. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Sessions Court as well as to the concerned Superintendent of Jail for information and necessary action. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Anjani JUDGE