1 2026:CGHC:8254 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 865 of 2025 Hemant Yadav S/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Salana Thengapara, Police Station- Vishrampuri, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Appellant. Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Vishrampuri, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Respondent. For Appellant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For State : Mr. Akash Agrawal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 16/02/2026 1. Heard on admission. 2. Admit. 3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01.03.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kondagaon, District Kondagon (C.G.) in Sessions Case No.50/2024, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence u/S 307 of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine amount additional RI for 2 month. 4. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Complainant Smt. Janki Mandwi (PW-1) resides in Village Salna Thengapara. On 14.05.2024 at about 7:00 AM, Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.02.17 11:55:17 +0530 2 while the victim Dayaluram Yadav (PW-2) (husband of PW-1) was washing his face in the courtyard of his house, the accused Hemant Yadav, arrived armed with a black wooden stick and repeatedly assaulted the victim on the head three times. This assault, witnessed by the complainant Smt. Janki Mandavi (PW-1) and due to said assault, the victim collapse and lose consciousness. When PW-1 raised hue and cry, his brother-in-law, Asharam Yadav came there for intervention, however, the accused fled toward Machhli Bandh. Subsequently, an FIR bearing Crime No. 30/2024 was registered at Police Station Vishrampuri for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC, leading to an investigation where the police recorded witness statements, prepared a spot map, seized the wooden stick of offence based on the accused’s memorandum statement, and obtained medical reports from the Community Health Center, Vishrampuri. Subsequently, the charge sheet was filed. 5. So as to hold the appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 16 documents. The statement of the appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. 6. After hearing the parties, by impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, learned Upper Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence as mentioned in Para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing the appeal so far as it relates to the conviction part of the judgment and would confine his argument to the sentence part thereof only. According to him, the incident was happened in May, 2024 and the appellant is in jail since 14.05.2024 i.e. for about 1 year and 9 months. The appellant is aged about 25 years, he has no criminal antecedents, and he is still serving the jail sentence, therefore, looking to the nature of case in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him and he may be released from jail. 8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for appellant. 3 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 10. Dr. Anurag Bharti (PW-10) opined in his evidence that the injured Dayalu Yadav had lacerated wounds on the head and he found following injuries: 1) Injury above right eye: 5x2 cm. 2) Injury on left side of head: 10x2 cm. 3) Injury on right side of head : 15x2 cm. All injuries were deep and blood was oozing out from said injuries. 11. Having gone through the material available on record and the evidence of the witnesses Dr. Gayatri Ohdar (PW-10), complainant Janki Yadav (PW-1) who is eye witness to the incident, injured Dayaluram Yadav (PW-2) and Asharam Yadav (PW-3) establish the involvement of the appellant in the crime in question. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 307 IPC and thus same is hereby maintained. 12. As regards sentence, in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1977) 3 SCC 287, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that if you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries and held in para-9 as follows: “9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 : "The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it’. George Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by re-culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive times. The human today views sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a 4 therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : “If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal Courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.” 13. In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the appellant jail since 14.05.2024, the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 7 years, out of which he has already served the jail sentence of i.e. 1 year and 9 month, no criminal antecedent of the appellant is recorded in the arrest memo (Ex-P/6), and as per Ex.P-/6 he has studied upto 8th class and working as labour, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. 14. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant under Sections 307 of IPC is maintained, but his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, the fine amount with default stipulation imposed upon the appellant by the trial Court shall remain intact. 15. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated herein- above. 16. The appellant is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case and if not required to be detained in default of the fine amount. 17. Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. A copy of the judgment may also be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent wherein the appellant is suffering the jail sentence. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Ajay