1 CGHC010088212012 2026:CGHC:27811 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 125 of 2012 Virendra Kumar Bhor S/o Deendayal Bhor R/o Tulsipur, Ward No 16 Rajnandgaon , Distt. Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Indira Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : 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 dated 14.12.2011, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Criminal Appeal No. 63/2011, whereby the learned appellate Court affirmed the judgment passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon, in Criminal Case No. 1205/2011 dated 03.10.2011, whereby, the applicant has been convicted and sentenced as follows:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) Rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine further RI for 06 months. Under Section 467 of the IPC. Rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and 6 months and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine further RI RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 for 06 months. Under Section 471 of the IPC. Rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and 6 months and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine further RI for 06 months. Under Section 468 of the IPC. Rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine further RI for 03 months. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, the petitioner was posted as Nayab Najir in Civil Court Khairagarh before 22.07.2009 and on 07.07.2007 the property seized in Criminal Case No. 274/2008 has been given by the Sushil Kumar Tiwari to the applicant to deposit in Malkhana which is cash of Rs. 1,36,300/- and the applicant has given the receiving of depositing the said property in the Treasury of Khairagarh, District – Rajnandgaon, and after transfer of the applicant Shri Dinesh Ojha was posted as Malkhana Muharrir and on 02.04.2009 judgment has been passed in the said Criminal Case No. 24/2008 and in view of the direction passed in the order regarding the disposal seized property reader sent the letter to the present Malkhana Moharrir and came to know that the seal affixed in the receiving of Malkhana/Treasury is forged one and no property has been deposited in the Treasury so the inquiry has been made in which the applicant accepted that he has not deposited the amount and he is ready to deposit the said amount, so the amount has been seized from the applicant and the report regarding the forgery has been lodged by Manish Thakur and on the basis of the report, the Police registered the Crime No. 183/2009 against the applicant and arrested the applicant in the alleged commission of the offence. The Police registered the 3 offence against the applicant and seized the cash of Rs. 1,36,000/- from the applicant and investigated the matter and file the charge- sheet before the trial Court concerned. 3. The learned trial Court on perusal of material available evidence on record found the applicant guilty and convicted and sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved by the judged of trial Court, the applicant preferred an appeal before the appellate Court. The appellate Court has affirmed the decision of the trial Court. Hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned trial Court as well as the appellate Court failed to consider the material on record and thus, the applicant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned in the paragraph 1 of this judgment, and itself is bad in law. Learned counsel submits that the applicant has already undergone about 2 years and 50 days of jail sentence, and fine amount has already been deposited by him. Therefore, the sentence already undergone by them may be suffice to meet the ends of justice. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment of the trial Court and records of the trial Court with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the trial Court after considering the material available on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, has convicted and sentenced the applicant as mentioned in paragraph 01 of this judgment, which has been affirmed by the learned appellate Court. I am of the view that the appellate Court have not committed any illegality or infirmity while affirming the 4 conviction of the applicant/accused for the offence under Sections 409, 467, 471 and 468 of IPC. Thus, the convictions are affirmed. 7. Now considering the question of sentence, as the applicant/accused is facing the criminal trial since 2011 and more than 15 years have been elapsed, considering the age of the applicant/accused at present and further considering that the applicant/accused has already undergone 2 years and 50 days of jail sentence, and fine amount has already been deposited by him, there would be no useful purpose to send the applicant/accused in jail again as he has already suffered agony of criminal trial for so many years, that meets the ends of justice. I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the applicant/accused, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by the applicant. Ordered accordingly. 8. The criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. 9. 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 Rajshekhar