1 2025:CGHC:12854 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 55 of 2008 1 - Rajkishore Prajapati S/o Laxman Prajapati, aged about 37 years, Occupation Cultivator, R/o Village Sarhari, Police Station Pratappur, Distt.-Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through P.S. Pratappur, Distt.-Surguja, C.G. ... Respondent For the appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate with Mr. Vikas Gritlahre, Advocate For the State : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 18/03/2025 1. The present criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.12.2007 passed in S.T.No. 45/2006 whereby A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2 the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Pratappur, District Sarguja convicted and sentenced the appellant as under : Under Section 11/24 of C.G. Medical Council Act, 1987 : RI for 6 months and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional RI for 2 months By the same impugned judgment, the appellant has been acquitted of the offence under section 304 IPC. 2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that deceased Sahalobaai wife of Pehlu Agariya resident of Sarhari was suffering from vomiting and diarrhea. The accused was treating her with the faith of curing her disease. During the treatment, Sahalobaai died due to wrong treatment by the accused. The matter having been informed by the husband, Merg intimation was recorded by the police (Ex. P-1). On the report of incident, FIR was registered vide Ex.P.12. After completing the procedural formalities, the dead body of deceased was subjected to postmortem and the doctor gave the report (Ex.P-7). During investigation, the spot maps of incident were prepared, necessary seizures were effected and statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completing the investigation and on complying with the procedural requirements, the charge sheet was filed. 3. The prosecution has in all examined 10 witnesses and exhibited 16 documents to prove its case. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC wherein he pleaded innocence and false implication. After conclusion of trial and considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material available on record, learned Trial Court by 3 impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument only on sentence part. He also submits that out of the short term sentence of 6 months awarded to him u/s 11/24 of Chhattisgarh Medical Council Act, he had already remained in jail for about 4 months 15 days. He submits that the incident took place in 2005, since then the appellant is facing the lis and this appeal is pending since 2008 and now he is aged about more than 56 years. He further submits that there are no criminal antecedents reported against the appellant and he has treated the deceased with bona-fide faith. He prays that looking to the nature of act attributed to the appellant, the sentence of the appellant under section 11/24 of the C.G. Medical Council Act, 1987 may be reduced to the period already undergone by him in the interest of justice. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 7. The trial Court held that the appellant was not a registered medical practitioner and did not comply with the norms of Medical Council Act, thereby the act committed by the appellant is punishable 4 u/s 11/24 of Chhattisgarh Medical Council Act, 1987 and accordingly placed conviction. 8. Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of witnesses especially complainant Pahlu Agariya (P.W.1) who is the husband of deceased, Dhanushdhari (P.W.2) and Babulal (P.W.3) this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 11/24 of the C.G. Medical Council Act, 1987 and it is hereby affirmed. 9. As regards the sentence of Appellant, considering the facts that the incident had taken place in 2005 about 19 years ago and the sentence imposed against him is RI for 6 months out of which, as stated by learned counsel the appellant had already remained in jail for about 4 months and 15 days and is facing the lis since 2005 and further looking to his present age as also considering the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against him, in the interest of justice, instead of again sending him to jail, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence of the appellant from 6 months R.I. to the period already undergone by him i.e., 4 months and 15 days for the offence punishable under Section 11/24 of the CG Medical Council Act, 1987. However, it is made clear that the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court shall remain intact. It is ordered accordingly. 5 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove. 11. Appellant is on bail. He need not again surrender in this case. However, his bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of the provisions contained in Section 437-A of the CrPC. 12. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for information and necessary action. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao