1 2026:CGHC:19651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 728 of 2026 1 - Ramsajeevan Kushwaha S/o Chandrika Prasad Khushwaha, Aged About 46 Years, Resident of Medhari Karamdiha, P.S. - Basantpur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Rambhajan Kushwaha S/o Chandrika Prasad Kushwaha, Aged About 42 Years, Resident of Premnagar, P.S. - Basantpur, District - Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Rambadan Kushwaha S/o Chandrika Prasad Kushwaha, Aged About 38 Years, Resident of Medhari Karamdiha, P.S. - Basantpur, District - Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Ajak Balrampur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellants : Mr. Shyamta Prasad Sannat, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Swati B. Gupta, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board 28.04.2026 1. This appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment dated 26.02.2026 passed in Special Sessions Case (Atrocities) No. 16/2022 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Balrampur, Place – Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, AKHILESH BEOHAR Digitally signed by AKHILESH BEOHAR Date: 2026.04.28 16:30:57 +0530 2 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 325 r/w Section 34 and 342 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months with fine of Rs.500/-; R.I. for 3 months with fine of Rs.500/- respectively, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 15 days each, with a direction to run the sentences concurrently. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Adil Sai (PW-01) lodged an FIR (Ex. P-1) at Police Station Basantpur stating that he earns his livelihood by agriculture and performing religious rituals. On 20.01.2022, upon being called by Rajmati Kushwaha (PW-05), he went to Village Rajkheta and, along with Rajmati, Devan Singh (PW-02), Dhan Singh (PW-04), and Navratan (PW-03), proceeded to a temple for performing puja with a goat. After completion of the ritual, while they were returning, the accused persons/appellants allegedly arrived, abused them in filthy language, and assaulted the complainant and Navratan with hands, fists, and sticks. It is further alleged that the complainant was forcibly taken near the house of Rajmati’s father, where he was tied with a rope and again beaten, causing grievous injuries to him. On the basis of the report, the injured were medically examined vide Exs. P-19, & P-20. During investigation, the accused were arrested, and a stick and nylon rope were seized. Spot maps were prepared and statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 3. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the concerned Trial Court against the appellants, who abjured the charge and pleaded non-guilty. 3 4. Learned Trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, acquitted the appellants under Sections 3(1)(n)(/k) of SC/ST Act, 506-II, 294 & 323/34 of the IPC, however, convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned in paragraph 1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellants but is challenging the sentence part, which, according to him, is on higher side. He further submits that the appellants have remained in jail for 1 month and 25 days i.e. from 22.03.2022 to 23.04.2022 and from 26.02.2026 to 24.03.2026, they are facing the lis since 2022 i.e. for more than 4 years and they have no criminal antecedent. This apart, the fine amount has already been deposited before the concerned trial Court. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, statements of complainant Adil Sai (PW-01), Navratan (PW-03), Devan Singh (PW- 02), supported with the other evidence available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding recorded by the learned Trial Court being based on the evidence available on record is correct finding. Thus, I hereby affirm the conviction of the appellants. 4 9. As regards the sentence part of the appellants, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the facts that appellants have remained in jail for 1 month and 25 days, they are facing the lis since 2022 i.e. for more than 4 years, they have no criminal antecedent, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon appellants, the jail sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, the sentences are directed to run concurrently. 10. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of appellants under the aforementioned Sections is affirmed and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. The fine sentence is hereby affirmed. 11. Since the appellants are reported to be on bail, therefore, their bail bond shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision contained under Section 481 of the BNSS, 2023. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Prakash