1 2026:CGHC:7017 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 831 of 2016 Jugdhar Mourya S/o Sukaluram Mourya Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Mundagaon, P.S. Bhanpuri, Revenue And Civil District Bastar, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kotwali, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan & Mr. Vikas Patel, Advocates For State/Respondent : Mr. Rishi Raj Pithawa, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment On Board 09/02/2026 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.06.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No.32/2014 by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar, Place Jagdalpur (C.G.) whereby, the trial Court has convicted 2 the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for 01 year. 2. According to the case of prosecution in brief is that in the night of 06.02.2014 at about quarter to nine o'clock, the injured Rajendra was sitting and working in his office with his assistant Raghunath Nag, when suddenly the accused Jughar, husband of his house maid Mangala, entered the applicant's office with sharp iron weapons in both his hands. He came stealthily with a stick and hit the applicant on the head with the intention of killing him. Raghunath intervened and rescued him. The applicant's forehead started bleeding due to the injury caused by the blow. Raghunath caught hold of the accused and snatched the egg from his hand. On hearing the screams, the applicant's mother and his neighbours came. The applicant came to the hospital in his car and brought the accused in the same car and filed a police report and handed him over to the police. 3. Based on the applicant's report, complaint No. 0/14 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. It was registered as Crime No. 52/14 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code at the Kotwali Police Station, Jagdalpur. The injured was given medical treatment. 4. During the investigation, spot map was prepared and the blood 3 stained shirt was seized. The statements of the injured Rajendra alias Raju, witnesses Raghunath, Smt. Magla Bai, Smt. Tilakam, Virendra Singh were recorded as per their instructions. 5. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the competent Court U/s. 307 of 1.P.C. and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act. 6. The trial Court on the basis of charge sheet and material available on record, framed charge under U/s. 307 of IPC and Sectiomns 25, 27 of Arms Act. The accused/appellant abjured the charges and pleads. innocence and prayed for justice. The trial Court after taking evidence, perusal of record, vide its judgment dated 28.06.2016, convicted the appellant under Section 324 of I.P.C. and sentenced to as per mentioned in cause title of the memo of appeal, and acquitted to the appellant from the other charges framed against him. Hence, this appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that he does not wants to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument to the sentence part only. He further submits that the incident is of the year 2014. Appellant is facing the lis from last 12 years. During trial, the appellant was in jail about 40 days and after conviction, he was in jail about 13 days, i.e, total he has undergone about 01 ½ months in 4 this case and there is no previous antecedent of the appelalnt, therefore, it is prayed that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State/respondent opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant, supported the impugned judgment and submits that sentence awarded by the trial Court is just and proper and requires no interference. 9. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record with utmost circumspection. 10. Smt. Tilkam Mudilyar (PW-2) who is mother of the injured – Rajendra @ Raju has stated in her examination-in-chief that the incident happened on the evening of 06/02/2014. At that time she was upstairs in her house. Hearing her son Raju's loud voice "Raghu-Raghu", She came down in panic and saw that her son was drenched in blood and Raghu was also present there and the accused Jugdhar was present there with a stick in his hand and Raghu caught the accused and her son took the injured accused in his car and drove himself to the hospital. After that she fainted. 11. Raju Mudilyar (PW-3) has stated in his statement that he acquainted with Jugdhar Maurya, the accused (Jugdhar) works in the dairy located 5 in his farm. He used to work before the incident. On the night of 06/02/2014, he was working in his office at his residence. His assistant Raghunath was also with him at that time. At around 8:45 pm, the accused Jugdhar came stealthily from the front and hit him on the head with a stick. After hitting him, as soon as he looked up, he saw Jugdhar standing in front of me with two sticks in both his hands. At that very moment, Raghu ran and overpowered him. He was drenched in blood. Meanwhile, on hearing Raghu's scream, Mataji from upstairs and Virendra Singh from the neighborhood came to the spot and went to the hospital in their car. Raghunath and Virendra caught the accused and made him sit in the same car. When the accused was caught and made to sit in the car, he was threatening that you have escaped for now, he has spoiled accused’s wife, he shall kill him. 12. Raghunath Nag (PW-4) has stated that he acquainted with accused Jugdhar Mirya present before the court. He also know the applicant Yujendra Mudaliar. The incident occurred on 06/02/2014 at 8:45 p.m. He was sitting in the office of applicant Rajendra Mudaliar, working as his assistant. Applicant Rajendra Mudaliar was also sitting with him when a man (accused) entered and attacked Rajendra Mudaliar on the head with a sharp weapon. At that very moment, he grabbed the accused, whose name he later learned was Jugdhar, and when he shouted, his neighbor Virendra and Rajendra's mother came down 6 from upstairs. Blood was flowing from the head of the injured Rajendra. Virendra and Rajendra went to the hospital. While going to the hospital, they caught the accused and took him along with them. There the accused was handed over to the police and Rajendra ji was admitted to the hospital in an injured condition. 13. Dr. S.N. Agarwal (PW-5) who posted in Medical College Jagdalpur as Assistant Professor since May 2012. He examined the injured – Rajendra. Upon examination, he found a wound measuring 9 cm x 1.0 cm x 0.5 cm on the left side of the victim's head (on the left temple). This wound appeared to have been caused by a sharp, hard weapon. The injury was found to be of a minor nature. The MLC report is Exhibit P-5. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and statement given by the witnesses and other material available on records, it transpires that the learned trial Court after considering the material available on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence. Considering the material available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the trial Court did not commit any illegality or infirmity in recordings the findings as regards conviction of the appellant in the aforesaid Section. 7 15. With regard to the sentence part, the sentence of the appellant is simple imprisonment for one year. Considering the fact that the date of incident is of the year 2014. Further, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the injured and also considering that the appellant has already undergone almost two months out of period of 01 year’s sentence imposed upon him by the trial Court, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the appellant, the jail sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Ordered accordingly. 16. The criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein- above. 17. Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant