1 CGHC010319192026 2026:CGHC:41852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1058 of 2026 Shiv Narayan Pendro S/o Vishwanath Singh Pendro Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Jamkachhar, Chowki Korvi, Thana Pasan, District- Korba, (C.G.) ... Applicant in jail versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J Judgment On Board (25th September, 2026) This criminal revision under Section 438 read with Section 442 of BNSS, 2023 has been preferred challenging the judgment dated 7.8.2026 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, Distt. Korba in Criminal Appeal No.09/2025 whereby the appeal filed by the 2 applicant against the judgment dated 24.1.2025 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katghora in Criminal Case No.3033/2018, convicting him under Section 325 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo SI for two years, pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to suffer one month’s additional SI, has been partly allowed and while upholding conviction u/s 325 of IPC, the substantive jail sentence awarded by the trial Court is reduced to six months’ RI and the fine amount enhanced to Rs.3000/- with default sentence of one month’s SI. 02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Ghursai and the accused/applicant Shiv Narayan Pendro are residents of village Jamkachhar. On the date of the incident, the complainant, along with his wife, had gone to the house of Umend Singh Guruji in the village to attend a feast. At about 3:00 p.m., after taking the meal, the complainant was lying on a cot in the open verandah outside the house. His wife Dhankunwar Bai and a village woman, Birso Bai, were sitting nearby and conversing. At that time, the accused came there and attempted to sit on the cot on which the complainant was lying. When the complainant started getting up, the accused abused him in filthy language and threatened to kill him. He thereafter assaulted the complainant with fists and blows, as a result of which the complainant fell to the ground and sustained an injury to his mouth, causing three of his teeth to break. The complainant's wife and Birso Bai intervened and separated them. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, 3 an offence under Sections 294, 506 Part-II and 325 of IPC was registered against the accused at Police Outpost Korbi, Police Station Pasan. During investigation, the three broken teeth of the complainant were seized. The accused was arrested and, the offences being bailable, he was released on bail. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the trial Court. 3. Learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 294, 506 Part-II and 325 of IPC against the accused/applicant, which were abjured by him. Learned trial Court having considered the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, while acquitting the applicant of the charges under Section 294 and 506 Part-II of IPC, convicted him under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced to undergo SI for two years, pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to suffer one month’s additional SI vide judgment dated 24.1.2025. 4. Being aggrieved, the applicant preferred an appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.09/2025 and the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, Distt. Korba, by the impugned judgment dated 7.8.2026 partly allowed the appeal and while maintaining conviction of the applicant under Section 325 of IPC, reduced the substantive jail sentence awarded by the trial Court to six months’ RI and enhanced the fine amount to Rs.3000/- with default sentence of one month’s SI. Out of the said fine amount, a sum of Rs.2000/- was directed to be paid to the victim Ghursai as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC. Hence this revision. 4 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant does not want to press this revision with regard to conviction part of the impugned judgment, rather he would confine his arguments only to the sentence part. He submits that the incident took place way back in the year 2018 over a trivial issue without there being any intention on the part of the applicant to cause any such injury to the complainant/victim; the applicant has no criminal antecedents at all, he was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty, he is languishing in jail since 7.8.2026 and as such, completed jail sentence of one month and twenty days till date, therefore, his jail sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount suitably. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the aforesaid prayer of the applicant and submits that the learned appellate Court has already taken a lenient view and reduced the sentence of the applicant, as such, there is no need to interference with the sentence part of the impugned judgment. The instant revision being devoid of any substance is liable to be dismissed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 8. Though learned counsel for the applicant is not pressing this revision on conviction part of the impugned judgment but as per deposition of complainant Ghursai (PW-1), it is clear that when the complainant was at his home, the applicant came there and started beating him with hands and fists as a result of which his 3 teeth got 5 broken and he also sustained injuries over his left shoulder and upper part of thigh. The said evidence remained unrebutted in cross- examination. His evidence also finds due support from the evidence of his wife PW-3 Dhankunwar, PW-5 Birso Bai, who were present at the spot as well as from the medical evidence of PW-4 Dr. Umashankar Singh, who deposed that upon examination of the complainant on 21.9.2018, he found three teeth of the complainant broken, there was abrasion on his back, both the knees and contusion on the left eyebrow. In the opinion of the doctor, the injury was grievous in nature vide his report Ex.P/4. As per seizure memo Ex.P/3, three broken teeth of the complainant were seized. Thus, from the above unrebutted ocular and medical evidence, it stands proved beyond reasonable doubt that it is the applicant who assaulted the complainant on the date of incident, as a result of which his three teeth were broken and he suffered the aforesaid injuries. Being so, conviction of the applicant under Section 325 of IPC being based upon proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, cannot be faulted with. 9. As regards sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of the case giving rise to the incident, the fact that both the parties are resident of the same village, the incident occurred over a trivial issue, there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant, the incident took place way back in the year 2018; the applicant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty; this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be served if the jail sentence 6 awarded to him by the appellate Court is reduced to the period of two months’ RI and the fine amount of Rs.3,000/- imposed upon him is enhanced to Rs.5,000/-, which shall be payable to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC. 10. In the result, the revision is partly allowed. While maintaining conviction of the applicant under Section 325 of IPC, the jail sentence awarded thereunder by the appellate Court is hereby reduced to two months’ RI and the fine amount of Rs.3,000/- imposed upon him is enhanced to Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the applicant shall suffer additional SI for one month. The said fine amount shall be payable to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of CrPC after due verification by the trial Court. The fine amount already deposited by the applicant and the amount already paid to the complainant shall be adjusted accordingly. The impugned judgment stands modified to the above extent. 11. The record of the trial Court along with copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and needful, if any. Sd/ (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Khan MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Digitally signed by MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Date: 2026.09.26 16:52:26 +0530