1 2026:CGHC:22459 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1176 of 2016 1 – Budhram, S/o Bisoha, Aged About 55 Years, 2 – Basant, S/o Mangal, Aged About 32 Years, 3 – Panchram, S/o Budhram Aged, About 22 Years, 4 - Latel @ Rajendra, S/o Budhram, Aged About 30 Years, All are R/o Thakurdeva, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicants : Mr. J.K. Gupta along with Mr. M.P. Shende, Advocate For State : Mr. Kanhaiya Ram Yadav, P.L. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 2 13 .05.2026 1. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.), vide judgment dated 19.08.2015 passed in Criminal Case No. 551/2014, while acquitting all the accused persons of the charges under Sections 294 and 506 Part-II of the IPC, convicted and sentenced the applicants as under:- Conviction Sentence U/s 323/34 of IPC RI for 3 months U/s 325/34 of IPC RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- and default of payment of fine amount to further undergo RI for 15 days U/s 452 of IPC RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- and default of payment of fine amount to further undergo RI for 15 days U/s 5 of C.G. Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.100/- and default of payment of fine amount to further undergo RI for 10 days 2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mungeli (C.G.), vide judgment dated 05.11.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No. H- 57/2015 partly allowed the appeal against the judgment passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) and convicted and sentenced the applicants as under:- 3 Applicant- Budhram Conviction Sentence U/s 452 of IPC RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- U/s 325 of IPC RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- U/s 323 of IPC RI for 1 month U/s 5 of Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.100/- [Fine amount has been deposited] Applicant No.2- Basant, Applicant No.3- Panchram and Applicant No.4- Latel @ Rajendra Conviction Sentence U/s 451 of IPC RI for 15 days and to pay fine of Rs.200/- U/s 5 of Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.100/- [Fine amount has been deposited] 3. In compliance with the order dated 05.05.2026 passed by this Court, the applicants are present before this Court today along with their counsel. Their presence is duly marked. 4. According to the prosecution case, as reflected in the charge- sheet filed before the learned trial Court, on 01.05.2014 at about 8:00 A.M., when complainant Phulbai was present at her house situated in village Thakurdeva, the accused/applicants allegedly 4 called her a “Tonhi” (witch) and abused her in filthy language. It is alleged that thereafter, with the intention to cause hurt and intimidate her, the accused persons unlawfully entered her house, committed criminal trespass, extended threats to kill her, and assaulted her by means of sticks and iron rods. It is further alleged that when her husband, Chandan, intervened to rescue her, he too was assaulted by the accused persons with sticks and rods, as a result of which Phulbai sustained injuries on her elbow and back, while Chandan suffered injuries on his back. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant at Police Station Jarhagaon, an FIR was registered against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 294, 506, 323/34 of the IPC. During the course of investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., seizure memo and spot map were prepared, and the injured persons were medically examined. 5. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 294, 506, 323, 325/34 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam. The learned trial Court framed the charges against the applicants under Sections 294, 506 part-II, 452 and 323/34, 325/24 of IPC and Section 5 of the Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam, to which applicants abjured their guilt and claimed to be tried. 5 6. In support of its case, prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses. The statements of the accused/applicants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence alleging false implication in the case. The accused did not lead any evidence in defence. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/applicants in the manner stated in para 1 of the judgment. 8. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 19.08.2015, the applicants/accused preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Court. The learned Appellate Court, vide judgment dated 05.11.2016, partly allowed the appeal and modified the conviction of the applicants as mentioend in para 2 of the judgment. 9. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is not pressing this revision on merits and would confine his arguments only to the question of sentence. He further submits that the applicants have remained in jail for about two and a half months and that the incident is alleged to have taken place in the year 2014; thus, about 12 years have elapsed since then. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. 6 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State supports the impugned judgment. However, he has no serious objection to the submission made by counsel for the applicants regarding reduction of the sentence to period already undergone. 11.Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 12. The learned Trial Court, upon appreciation of the evidence adduced by complainant Phool Bai (PW-1), injured witness Chandan Khande (PW-2), Dr. Anil Gupta (PW-3), Dr. D.S. Kanwar (PW-4), Dr. M.K. Tiwari (PW-6) and Investigating Officer B.D. Manikpuri (PW-7), recorded a finding that the applicants abused and harassed the complainant, branding her as “Tonhi” (witch), and further assaulted Phool Bai and Chandan Khande, as a result of which they sustained injuries. 13. The learned Trial Court meticulously appreciated the testimonies of the complainant and injured witnesses and also considered the medical evidence adduced by Dr. Anil Gupta (PW-3), Dr. D.S. Kanwar (PW-4) and Dr. M.K. Tiwari (PW-6). Upon consideration of the entire oral and medical evidence available on record, the learned Trial Court found the applicants guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 323/34, 325/34 and 452 of the IPC as well as Section 5 of the C.G. Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam and sentenced them accordingly as mentioned hereinabove. In appeal, the learned Appellate Court duly considered and re- appreciated the entire evidence and the grounds raised by the 7 applicants. Upon such re-appreciation, the learned Appellate Court rightly affirmed the conviction of applicant Budhram while acquitting the remaining applicants of the charges under Sections 323/34 and 325/34 of the IPC. The learned Appellate Court further altered their conviction from Section 452 IPC to Section 451 IPC and, accordingly, partly allowed the appeal preferred by the applicants. 14. Having considered the evidence of the complainant, injured witnesses and the medical evidence available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Appellate Court has rightly modified the judgment passed by the Trial Court and has rightly maintained the conviction of the applicants for the aforesaid offences. 15. So far as the question of sentence is concerned, considering the fact that the applicants have already remained in custody for about two and a half months and that the incident pertains to the year 2014, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by sending the applicants back to jail at this stage. The ends of justice would be adequately met if the sentence imposed upon the applicants is reduced to the period already undergone by them and directed to pay additional fine amount of Rs.10,000/- for the aforesaid offences, which shall, in turn, be disbursed to the complainant and the injured persons. 8 16. In the result, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction of applicant Budhram under Sections 452, 325, 323 of the IPC and Section 5 of the Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam, as well as the conviction of applicants Basant, Panchram and Latel @ Rajendra under Section 451 of the IPC and Section 5 of the Tonhi Pratarna Adhiniyam, are hereby affirmed. However, the substantive jail sentence awarded to the applicants is reduced to the period already undergone by them. It is noted that the applicants have already deposited the entire fine amount of Rs.2,000/- before the trial Court. They are further directed to deposit an additional fine amount of Rs.10,000/-. Upon such deposit, the said amount shall be disbursed to the complainant and injured persons by the trial Court after due verification. In the event of failure to deposit the aforesaid additional fine amount, the applicants shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. 17. The applicants are reported to be on bail, therefore, their bail bonds shall remain in operation for a period of six months as provided under Section 481 of BNSS, 2023. 18. The Trial Court's record along with the copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) JUDGE Ruchi RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV