1 CGHC010282362016 2026:CGHC:27810 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 647 of 2016 Harishankar Netam S/o Bhaktu Ram Netam Aged About 42 Years R/o Shyamnagar, Antagarh, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.07.2026 1. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 05.07.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, North Bastar Kanker, (C.G.), in criminal appeal No. 13/2013, arising out of the judgment and order dated 06.05.2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanker, in criminal case No. 153/2013, whereby the applicant was convicted and sentenced as under :- CONVICTION SENTENCE Under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.08 11:07:00 +0530 2 Under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. Under Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. Under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. Under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. Under Section 477-A of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. Under Section 204 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months. (All the sentences were directed to be run concurrently) 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant and the other co- accused persons allegedly collected tax amounts by issuing forged receipts and misappropriated the collected amounts. It is further alleged that a report to this effect was lodged by the then Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Antagarh, at Police Station Bhanupratappur, on the basis of which offences were registered against the applicant and the other co-accused persons. 3. After completion of the necessary investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the learned trial Court and the case was committed to the trial Court for trial. 4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanker, framed charges against the applicant and the co-accused. The applicant and the co-accused 3 denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Upon appreciation of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court vide order dated 06.05.2013 convicted the applicant for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 471-A and Section 204 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 - 02 years and imposed fine amount of Rs. 500/- in default of payment further R.I. for 03 months for each offences. (all the sentences shall run concurrently). 5. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 06.05.2013, the applicant preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the learned Appellate Court released the applicant on bail. However, without properly considering the grounds raised in the appeal, the learned Appellate Court summarily dismissed the appeal vide order dated 05.07.2016 in Criminal Appeal No. 13/2013. Hence, the present revision petition. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the term of maximum sentence awarded to the applicant is 2 years and the applicant has already suffered 1 year, 01 month and 22 days of jail sentence and has already deposited the fine amount imposed upon him. He further submits that considering age of the applicant at present who is aged about 52 years and as he has been facing criminal trial since 2012 and thereafter more than 15 years have been elapsed, the sentence already undergone by him may be suffice to meet the ends of justice. 7. Learned State counsel submits that both the Courts have rightly convicted and sentenced the applicant, in which no interference is called for. 4 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the learned trial Court, after considering the material available on record and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, convicted the applicant as mentioned in the opening paragraph. In the appeal preferred by the applicant, the appellate Court affirmed the order passed by the learned trial Court. Considering the material available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the learned appellate Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity in affirming the order passed by the learned trial Court. 10. Now considering the question of sentence. As the applicant has faced criminal trial since 23.01.2012 to 06.05.2013 and though the appeal is also continued for about 03 years and this revision petition has been pending since 11.07.2016 and as such from the date of commencement of trial, more than 13 years have been elapsed, considering the age of the applicant at present and further considering the fact that the term of maximum sentence awarded to the applicant for offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 471-A and Section 204 of the Indian Penal Code is RI for 02 – 02 years for each offences and the applicant has already suffered jail sentence near about 01 year, 01 month and 21 days and has already deposited the fine amount imposed upon him, there would be no useful purpose to send the applicant again in jail as he has already suffered undergone sentence and also agony of criminal trial for so many years, that meets the ends of justice. So this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the sentence from R.I. for 02 – 02 years for the 5 offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 471-A and Section 204 of the Indian Penal Code, respectively to the period already undergone by the applicant. Ordered accordingly. 11. The criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein- above. 12. Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek