1 2025:CGHC:16792 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2020 Hari Krishna Das S/o Shri Devendra Das Aged About 48 Years R/o Mana Camp Colony, Police Station Mana, Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent _________________________________________________________ For Appellant : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, PL __________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment On Board 09/04/2025 1. Today when the matter is called out for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant I, therefore, requested for assistance from a Counsel of the High Court Legal Aid Services Committee, Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate has been nominated to assist the 2 Court. 2. I have gone through the judgment under appeal and the depositions of witnesses and exhibits assisted both by Advocate, Mr. Krishna Tandon through the High Court Legal Services Committee and Learned State Counsel. In view of (2014) 14 SCC 222 (Surya Baksh Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh), I do not consider it necessary to adjourn this case and issue fresh notice to the Appellant as his interest has been duly taken care of by nominating another Counsel from the High Court Legal Services Committee. 3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (henceforth ‘the Cr.P.C.') questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.11.2019 passed in Special Criminal Case No.01/18 by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur (C.G.), whereby the appellant convicted and sentenced as under :- Conviction Sentence In Default Under Section 354 of IPC R.I. for 02 years and fine amount of Rs.500/- In default of payment of fine amount, further RI for one month Under Section 323 of IPC R.I. for 04 months and fine amount of Rs.500/- In default of payment of fine amount, 3 further RI for one month Under Section 294 of IPC R.I. for 01 month ----- Under Section 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act R.I. for 06 months and fine amount of Rs.500/- In default of payment of fine amount, further RI for one month 4. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the victim is resident of village Tuta, District-Raipur and working as a daily wager labour. About two years prior of incident, victim was working as a labour in garden nursery at Mana where accused was also working as a Supervisor and was misbehaving with her with malafide intention, therefore, being disturbed by the behavior of accused, the victim had to quit her job. On 01.12.2017 at 4:00 PM, when victim was going to the market with her daughter, accused Hari Krishna Das came on his motorcycle and followed victim and her daughter and was also using abusive words and when both mother and daughter reached in front of home of Banarasi, the victim was slammed on the ground and physically abused and threaten to kill, because of which an injury occurred on right hand. 5. After incident, victim went to house of Banarasi and informed about the incident to Banarasi and thereafter filed an F.I.R. in 4 Abhanpur Police Station. Spot map of the place of incident was prepared, caste certificate of the victim was seized and seizure memo was prepared, statement of witnesses was recorded under Section 161 CrPC and after other necessary investigation proceedings, charge-sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 354, 294, 506, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 6. In order to prove the charges against the appellant (accused), prosecution examined as many as 08 witnesses. Statement of appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence witness was examined by the appellant. 7. After appreciation of evidence available on record, learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph 03 of this appeal. Hence, this appeal. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the learned trial Court has wrongly been convicted the appellant without any sufficient and clinching evidence available on record against the appellant. He further contended that the lodging of First Information Report was pre-planned as the victim was removed from her job by accused due to irregularities committed 5 by her while performing her duties. The victim stated about different story of incident to the person namely Revthy allegation. from her allegation. He further contended that it is revealed by the statement of Anil Banarasi (PW-3) allegation made by victim is fabricated. Further, the statement given by the doctor that the injury which is found on hand of victim may have been framed by herself. The seizer witness stating that no vehicle was seized from the accused whereas the victim said that the accused came with his motorcycle. It is also contended that the independent witnesses not supported the case of prosecution. It is therefore, prayed that this Court may kindly be set aside the impugned judgment dated 23.11.2019 and the appellant may be acquitted from the charges levelled against him. 9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant and supported the impugned judgment passed by the Court below. 10. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused entire evidence adduced by the prosecution and gone through the evidence available on record with utmost circumspection. 11. In order to consider the version of the victim, I have to examine the evidence/material placed on record by the 6 prosecution. Victim (PW-1) in Para-2, has stated in her evidence recorded before the trial Court that 03 years ago, the accused came to her village Tuta and took her, Bhuri and Shyamabai to work in Mana's garden to water the garden. The accused used to work as a security guard in Mana's garden. The accused made her work as a labourer for two days. On the third day too, when she went to work, the accused molested her in Mana's garden and beat her up saying that he will do dirty things. She ran away to her home and stopped working in the garden. After this, the accused started following her and molested her three times. She went to the accused's mother-in-law, whose name is not known, three times and tried to make the accused understand. The accused's mother- in-law tried to make the accused understand but when he did not listen, the mother-in-law asked her to file a report. 12. This witness has stated in Para-3 of statement that in the month of December, 2017, she and her daughter were going to the market in Teli Talab in village Tuta. On the way, the accused came on a Honda motorcycle and chased her and her daughter. The accused abused her and said that she don't do dirty things with him. The accused chased her and threw her near Banarasi's house and beat her up and do misbehave with her by touching her body. After the incident, Banarasi and his wife Revati came to their house and she 7 told them about the incident. Her hand was injured which she told Banarasi and his wife about. The bangle on her hand was broken. 13. Revti (PW-2) has stated in her statement that the victim had told the name of the person who committed the crime as Harikrishna. The victim had not told that Harikrishna/accused molested her and when she objected, he beat her up due to which she got injured in the hand. 14. Anil Kumar (PW-3) has stated in his statement that the victim had told him that the accused had caught the victim outside our house's ranch by abusing her and had thrown her down with the intention of humiliating her, had threatened to kill her and had beaten her. He further stated that “it is wrong to say that the victim’s bangle was broken and she had an injury on her hand.” 15. Dr. Smt. S.D. Kanwar (PW-4) posted as Medical Officer in the Community Health Center, Abhanpur District Raipur (C.G.), who examined the victim and found the following injuries during her examination- (I) There was a bruise on the upper part of his right wrist in the shape of a line measuring 1/4 cm by 1/2 inch. (ii) There was a bruise on the upper part of his left 8 wrist in the shape of a line measuring 1/4 cm by 1/2 inch. (iii) She had pain and swelling in the middle finger of his right hand. On examination, she said that it was painful. The doctor had advised her to get an X-ray of her right hand and right finger done. The said injury was done within 3 to 6 hours of the examination. The said injury was of normal nature as per her examination. Her report is Exhibit P-2. She stated that if a person falls on the mud while running, the injured will get the above injuries. The witness herself said that by falling on the mud, other parts of the body will also get injured. 16. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant on the ground that the evidence adduced by prosecution has established beyond doubt that on the date of incident, the act committed by the accused with a view to outrage the modesty of the victim. The said finding recorded by the trial Court is based upon the evidence available on record which is not perverse nor contrary to the records. Thus, in considered opinion of this Court that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC as well as other offence as mentioned in Para-3 of this appeal. I do not find any 9 illegality and irregularity or jurisdictional error in the findings recorded by the trial Court with regard to the conviction part. Thus, conviction of appellant is hereby affirmed/maintained. 17. As regards the quantum of sentence, considering that incident in question took place in the month of December, 2017 and now almost 07 years have passed. During these years, appellant must have suffered tremendous mental trauma and anguish of trial. Further considering that maximum jail sentence awarded to the appellant is two years, and he has granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.11.2021, so keeping in view all the circumstances, ends of justice will be served if the sentence under Section 354 of IPC imposed upon appellant is reduced from RI 02 years to RI 01 year. 18. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction and sentence of appellant under Sections 323, 294 of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are hereby affirmed/maintained. However, sentence under Section 354 of IPC imposed upon the appellant by the trial Court is reduced from 02 years to 01 year and the fine amount imposed upon him is enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, appellant shall further undergo RI for one month. 10 19. With the aforesaid observations, the instant appeal is partly allowed to the extent shown above. 20. Records of the Court below be sent back along with copy of this judgment for information and necessary compliance. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant