1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 78 of 2026 1 - Heera Singh S/o Shri Bhukhan Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Pakariya, P.S. Gaurela, District Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) 2 - Rajkumar, S/o Shri Bhukhan Singh, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Pakariya, P.S. Gaurela, District Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Officer-In-Charge, Police Station Gaurela, District Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Syed Afaque Hussain Rizvi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Aman Tamrakar, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 05/05/2026 Heard. 1. The present revision filed under Section 438/442 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.01.2026 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No.57/2024 whereby the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal while upholding the judgment dated 28.11.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.406/2018 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pendra Road convicting the applicants under Section 325/34 IPC and sentencing them to suffer RI for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- each with default sentence of SI for one month. Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.05.05 18:13:45 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 17.06.2018 at about 9:00 pm, when the complainant – Lata Bai was ploughing her field, at that time, her uncles Hira Singh and Rajkumar came there and abused her in filthy language with respect to the ploughing of land and threatened her life, thereafter, accused Rajkumar assaulted her with a stick, while Hira Singh twisted her right hand, causing injury to her wrist. Later, the accused persons again came to her house, abused and assaulted her. On report being lodged to the above effect by her (P.W.1), offence under Crime No.172/18 has been registered at Police Station Gaurella against the applicants. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pendra Road against the applicants, who abjured the charge under Sections 294, 506 Part-II and 325/34 IPC and pleaded non-guilty. 4. The Court of JMFC and the appellate Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, while acquitting the applicants of the charge under Sections 294, 506 Part-II IPC, convicted and sentenced the applicants, as mentioned in opening paragraph. Hence, this Revision by the present applicants. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the applicants and confined his argument to sentence part, which, according to him, is on higher side. He further submits that the dispute arose between the applicants and the complainant over the ploughing of land, which is trivial in nature. He further submits that the applicants were on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to them and they were in jail from 06.01.2026 till date, i.e., 4 months, they have no criminal antecedents 3 and that, they are facing the lis since July, 2018, i.e., for more than 7 years. On these premises, he urged that the jail sentence awarded to the applicants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 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 complainant PW-1 Lata Bai supported by the evidence of P.W.2 Kapur Singh, husband of the complainant and medical evidence of P.W.4 Dr. A.I.Minj and P.W.6 Dr. Abhimanyu Singh, who proved the M.L.C. report (Ex.P.5) and the other evidence and material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding of conviction 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. 9. As regards the sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the applicants are in jail since 06.01.2026, i.e., 4 months, they are facing the lis since July, 2018 i.e. for more than 7 years, there are no criminal antecedents against them, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the applicants, the jail sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. 10. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed. While maintaining conviction of the applicants under Section 325/34 of IPC, the sentence imposed thereunder by the Appellate Court is hereby modified and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. The fine 4 sentence and default sentence is affirmed. 11. It is reported that the applicants are in jail. They shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in other case. 12. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned and concerned Superintendent of Jail forthwith for information and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani