1 2026:CGHC:1771 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3655 of 2025 1 - Bajrangi Lal Prajapati S/o Dashrath Lal Prajapati Aged About 42 Years R/o Chindanpara, Chowki Kotmikala, P.S. Pendra, District : Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh. … Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S H O, P.S. Pendra, District : Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate For State/ Respondent(s) : Mr. RCS Deo, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Judgment on Board 12.01.2026 1. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking modification of the order dated 04.11.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court in CRR No.1332/2025. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the aforesaid Criminal Revision was partly allowed by this Hon’ble Court however, due to a ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.01.30 17:53:17 +0530 2 typographical error in paragraphs 14 and 15 of the judgment, it has been recorded that the applicant has undergone imprisonment for a period of “2 years and 45 days”. It is clarified that the applicant had in fact remained in custody for about six months during the trial and was thereafter enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondent has raised no objection to the correction sought. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Considering the submissions advanced and the factual aspects of the case, the typographical error in paragraph 14 and 15 of the order dated 04.11.2025 passed in CRR No.1332/2025 is hereby corrected and shall be read as under: “14. 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 maximum sentence imposed upon the applicant is 05 years, out of which he has already served the jail sentence of about six months and also considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, that Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the applicant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him.” “15. Accordingly, the conviction of the applicant under Section 420/34, 467/34, 468/34 and 471/34 of IPC is maintained, but his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. six months days. 3 However, the fine and its default stipulation imposed upon the applicant by the appellate Court under the said sections shall remain intact.” 6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Arpan/-