1 CGHC010109302019 2026:CGHC:34166 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 453 of 2019 Smt. Rajni Katela W/o Shri Basant Lal Katela Aged About 71 Years R/o In Front Of Ex. S.P. Banglow, Civil Line, Raipur, Police Station- Civil Line, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District- Magistrate, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Deleted (Parasmal Bhansali) Deleted As Per Hon’ble Court Order Dated 14-09-2021. 3 - Mukesh Bhansali S/o Shri Parasmal Bhansali Aged About 53 Years R/o Malviya Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Rajkumar Bhansali S/o Shri Parasmal Bhansali R/o Malviya Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Subhashish Jain S/o Late Parasmal Jain R/o Beron Bazar, Raipur, Presently R/o Near Water Tank, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Dharmchand Bhansali S/o Mohan Lal Bhansali R/o Halwai Line, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Shivral Bhansali S/o Mohan Lal Bhansali R/o Halwai Line, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Sunil Soni S/o Kanwar Lal Soni R/o Sunder Nagar, Raipur, Presently R/o At Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent No.1/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.2 to 8 : Mr. Keshaw Dewangan, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 appearing for the private respondent No.1/State, as well as Mr. Sumit Verma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 to 8. 2. The applicant has preferred this criminal revision, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.01.2019 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 197/2018; whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/complainant for enhancement of sentence, has been dismissed and acquitted the respondent Nos. 2 to 8/accused from the offence under Sections 138 of the 147, 148, 427, 448 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and set aside the order of conviction dated 09.04.2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, District – Raipur (C.G.), in Criminal Case No. 388/2010. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 24.01.1993 the applicant/complainant intimated the Police of Police Station Kotwali, District – Raipur, that on 24.01.1993 at near about 10 a.m. accused persons along with 30-40 persons reached in the house of the complainant/applicant with arms and broken the lock of the gate of the applicant's house and unlawfully entered into the house of the complainant misbehaved with and abused with complainant and her daughter and threatened to kill both of them and thereafter, accused persons broken the door of the room and started to thrown precious articles worth rupees 20,000/- and documents and broken some precious articles. On the basis of complaint the matter was investigated by the Police and thereafter, the offence punishable under Sections 147,148,448,294,506 (Β), 427 of the Indian Penal Code was registered and submitted the charge sheet before the Court of Judicial Magistrate 3 First Class, Raipur. After recording the evidence and after hearing the parties, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur by impugned judgment dated 09.04.2018 convicted the accused persons under Section 147, 148, 427, 448 and 294 of the IPC. Thereafter applicant/complainant filed criminal appeal No. 197/2018 against the impugned judgment dated 09.04.2018 for enhancement of sentence of the accused persons against the judgment passed in criminal case No. 388/2010 and after hearing the parties, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur by impugned judgment dated 31.01.2019 acquitted the accused persons for the aforesaid offences. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the judgment passed by the learned appellate Court being illegal, erroneous and contrary to law deserves to be set-aside. It is further submitted that the acquittal of the accused persons cannot be sustained in the eye of law, as there is sufficient evidence available on record to convict the accused persons for commission of offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 427, 448 of the IPC. It is further submitted that the complainant has stated in her statement and supported the prosecution story in para 1 to 5 and 19, 20, 21 and 22 that accused persons entered into her house and broken the door, window and other articles and spread the iron wire on the floor and abused the complainant and her daughter with filthy language and threaten to kill her. Thus, the impugned order passed by the appellate Court is liable to be quashed and set-aside. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the 4 impugned judgment and order dated 31.01.2019 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 197/2018; whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/complainant for enhancement of sentence, has been dismissed and acquitted the respondent No.2 to 8/accused from the offence under Sections 138 of the 147, 148, 427, 448 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and set aside the order of conviction dated 09.04.2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, District – Raipur (C.G.), in Criminal Case No. 388/2010, and he further submits that the respondent Nos. 2 to 8 have rightly been acquitted and there is no illegality while passing the impugned order, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant/complainant is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent Nos. 2 to 8 also opposed the prayer contained in the instant criminal revision, and endorsed the submissions raised by the learned State counsel. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 8. Taking into consideration the fact that the learned appellate Court has observed that despite the allegation that about 30–40 persons had assembled at the place of occurrence, the prosecution failed to produce reliable and cogent evidence to conclusively establish the presence and participation of respondent Nos.2 to 8 in the alleged incident. The evidence led by the prosecution was found to be insufficient to prove the essential ingredients of the offences 5 punishable under Sections 147, 148, 427, 448 and 294 of the IPC beyond reasonable doubt. The learned Appellate Court, therefore, rightly set aside the judgment of conviction dated 09.04.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, District – Raipur (C.G.), in Criminal Case No.388/2010, acquitted respondent Nos.2 to 8 of all the charges levelled against them and consequently dismissed the appeal preferred by the applicant seeking enhancement of sentence, and this Court does not find any infirmity of illegality in the impugned judgment passed by learned appellate Court, warranting interference of this Court. 9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being deviod of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 10. A copy of this order be as well as the original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar