Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
CGHC010321862026
2026:CGHC:38969
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2195 of 2026 Metha Ji @ Mehtaram S/o Late Narayan Rao Girepuje Aged About 69 Years R/o Mana Basti, Police Station Mana Camp, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
... Appellant (s) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mana Camp, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Binu Sharma, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice
Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board 03/09/2026
1. The appellant has filed this criminal appeal on 12.08.2026 against the
judgment dated 20.08.2008 passed by learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur in Special Sessions Case No. 04 of 2008, by which the appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 323/34 of the IPC and sentencing by granting benefit of probation. 2. Since the appeal is filed after almost 16 years of passing of judgment, therefore, the appeal is supported by an application for condonation of delay, as such the matter has been heard on condonation of delay as well as on merit of the appeal. SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2026.09.08 11:13:52 +0530
2
3. Counsel for the appellant while making his submission with regard to condonation of delay would submit that earlier counsel has wrongly informed him that he has been acquitted and not required to go to jail, as such due to wrong advice of the counsel the appellant should not be suffered and would pray for condonation of delay. He would further submit that he has preferred the Criminal Revision No. 801 of 2008 which was disposed of by this Court on 05.12.2018 as complainant Sanjay P. Oberai expired. It has been further contended that on the same set of charge, departmental enquary was conducted which was concluded against him on the count of conviction passed by the trial Court on 20.08.2008. He would further submit that in the enquiry he was inflected with penalty of reduction to one stage lower in time scale of pay for a period of one year and the period of suspension from 23.4.2007 to 03.08.2009 has not been treated on duty. He has challenged the punishment order before CGIT Jabalpur which has decided against him. Being aggrieved with this award he has filed writ petition before High Court of Madhya Pradesh in WPL No. 67 of 2025 and the same is still pending. Since due to this punishment order he has suffered lot, which has compelled him to file present Criminal Appeal challenging the order of conviction and would pray for allowing the application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. 4.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel, I am of the view that the reason assigned for condonation of delay cannot be and should not be sufficient ground for conditioning the delay as the appellant has already been granted the benefit of probation, a lenient view has already been taken by the Court looking to the fact that he was a Government servant. Even
3 otherwise, it is well settled position of law that in criminal jurisprudence and service jurisprudence work in a different sphere, as punishment under service law imposed for misconduct whereas criminal law punish the accused for offence for which he has committed and punishment in criminal law has no binding upon the punishment imposed in service law. Therefore, application for condonation of delay submitted by the appellant deserves to be rejected. 5. Record of the case would further demonstrate that conviction order was passed in the year 2008 and more than 18 years have already been lapsed and learned trial court on appreciation of evidence, material on record particularly statement of complainant Sanjay Oberai has recorded its finding of conviction commission of offence under Section 323/34 of the IPC which does not suffer from perversity or illegality warranting interference by this Court, as such I am of the view that the present criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed on the count of delay as well as on the merit. 6. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge santosh