1 2026:CGHC:2479 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2107 of 2024 Dinu Prasad Sharma S/o. Shri Poshan Kumar Sharma Aged About 38 Years R/o. Near Dadar Charoda Pump House Police Station Old Bhilai, Tehsil And Distt. Durg (C.G.) India. ... Petitioner versus State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Old Bhilai-Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For the appellants : Mr. Ajay Kumar Mishra, dvocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order/Judgment on Board 15.01.2026 1. The present criminal appeal under Section 415 of CrPC has been preferred by appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Durg, District Durg in Sessions Case No. 45/2022 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.01.16 18:40:22 +0530 2 Conviction : Sentence 307 IPC (four times) RI for 10 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional RI for 6 months. (four times) Every jail sentence shall run concurrently. 2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that a report was lodged by complainant Nirmala Sahu that on 25.01.2022 accused Dinu Prasad Sharma came to her house to perform Puja and at 12.55 pm, he performed Puja for one hour in the presence of all her family members. After that, accused said “this is a secret Puja, do not tell any one other wise the said Puja will loose its efficacy and saying this he left after performing Aarti. Again after one hour, accused came with a bag and sat down for Puja to which the complainant’s husband Vishnu Prasad Sahu said that you do not know how to perform Puja, on which, the accused got angry and took out an iron axe which he had brought in a cloth bag and with the intention of killing her husband, the accused repeatedly assaulted his head due to which blood started flowing. When the complainant and her two children Suman Sahu and Jitesh Sahu tried to intervene, he assaulted everyone with the sharp sharp axe and due to which, the complainant got injured on the back of her neck, hands and body and her daughter and son also got injured on the head. On hearing their shouts, the people of the neighborhood came to their rescue there and caught the accused and then they got admitted the injured persons in an hospital. On the basis of such report, the crime was registered and during investigation the statements of injured 3 witnesses were recorded and after complying with the procedural formalities, the charge sheet was filed. 3. The prosecution has in all examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 43 documents to prove its case. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC, abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication. After conclusion of trial and considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material available on record, learned Trial Court by impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellants, as mentioned above. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 2022 and the accused appellant is in jail since 26.01.2022 and there are no criminal antecedents against him and further looking to the nature of profession as he is serving as Priest, he prays that the sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant. He submits that the medical report Ex.P-14, 15, 16 & 17 would show that the injuries sustained by the complainant, her husband and two children are grievous in nature. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 4 7. Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of injured witnesses – complainant Nirmala Sahu (P.W.1), Vishnu Prasad Sahu (P.W.2), Suman Sahu (P.W.3), Jitesh Sahu Sahu (P.W.6) as also independent witness Trilok Sonkar (P.W.7) which all further stood firm by the evidence of Dr.Vikas Agrawal (P.W.5) and other medical reports Ex.P-14, P-15, P-16 & P-17, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable 307 of IPC and it is hereby affirmed. 8. However, as regards sentence, in Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1977) 3 SCC 287, Hon’ble Supreme Court while emphasizing the reformative approach has exposited the words expressed by George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries. Para-9 of the said judgment is quoted below : “9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 : "The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it’. George Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by re-culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive times. The human today views 5 sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : “If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal Courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.” 9. Applying the analogy laid down in Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 10 years under section 307 IPC and the appellant is in jail since 26.01.2022 and as per the Arrest Memo (Ex.P.13), the appellant has studied upto 12th class; by profession he is a priest (Panditayan) and there are no criminal antecedents against him and thus looking to the over-all circumstances it will be just and proper if the sentence 10 years RI awarded by the trial court for offence under section 307 IPC is reduced to 5 years RI. Accordingly, The conviction u/s 307 IPC (four times) is maintained and the sentence is reduced from 10 years to 5 years (four times). However, the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court shall remain intact. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated here-in-above. 11. The appellant in jail since 26.1.2022. His period of custody will be set off against the 5-year sentence. 6 12. Let a certified copy of this order along with the original record be transmitted to the concerned trial Court forthwith for information and necessary action. A copy of this judgment be also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing jail sentence. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao