Allowed

Ravikant Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Apr 2012CRMP/286/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal and dismissed the quashing petition. Setting aside the conviction and sentence, the court held the accused acquitted due to insufficient evidence of identification, rejecting the claim for money recovery.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; applicant set at liberty; fine refunded; Cr.M.P. dismissed.

Ravikant Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR.

¶2

Cr.M.P.No/^^fc OF 2008

¶3

Applicant. ,^/^^::
^
^•;'kF' .<?
fc^1 ^<
;...'• ^v ^
^/-
.^y
. ^'^<
Npn-apj>li6ant
^.

¶4

Ravikant Sahu, S/o. Muiifram Sahu, ^ aged about 26 years, Resident of H.I.G.-15, C-l, C-2 Behind Niharika, Korba (C.G.).

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Kotwali, Korba, District Korba (C.G.)

¶7

s^% .V-? ^
j'-
A^ ^PLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE
^ff
^ ^ CODE OF CMMINAL PROCEDURE
^\v^
^_Ci •\ , ^' &•

¶8

Pase 1 oi 4

¶9

HJOH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BiLASFUR

¶10

Crinninai AppsaS No.SSS of 2097

APPELLANT

Vikram Yadav

(In Jaii)

Versus

RESPOrJDENT

State of Chhattisgarh

¶17

(Criminai Appeai under Section 374(2) ofthe Cr.P.C.)

¶18

Anci

¶19

Cr.jVi.P.No.28e of 2008

APPLlCANT

Ravikant Sahu

Versus

Non-apDiicaRt

State of Chhattisgarh

¶25

(Petition under Section 482 ofthe Cr.P.C.)

¶26

Mr.V.C.Ottsivvar, counsei forthe appeiSant in Cr.A.No.899/2007. Mrs.Hamlda SIddique, counsei for the appSicant in Cr.M.P.No.286/2008.

¶27

h/ir.Sangeeta Mishra, Panei Lawyer for the Stats in both cases.

¶28

(S8: Hon'bie Mr. T.P. Shamna, J.)

¶29

JUDGJViENT

¶30

(Passed on 3.4.2012)

¶31

Criminai Appeai No.899/2007 filed by appeiiant-Vikram Yadav and Cr.iV{.P.No.28S/2008 flied by appiicant-Ravikant Sahu are arising out of the Judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 19.9.2007 passed by the Second Additionai Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Korba, in Sessions Triai No.64/2005, therefore, they are belng disposed of by this common judgment.

¶32

¶33

By Criminaj Appeai No.899/2007 appeiiant-Vikram Yadav has chailenged iegaiity and propriety or the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 1 9.9.2007 passed by the S^econd Additionai Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Korba, in Sessions Triai No.64/2006, whereby the triaj Court has convicted appeiiant Vikram Yadav for the offence

¶34

Cr.A.No.899/2007 & Cr.M.P.No. 286/2008

¶35

Page2of4

¶36

punishabie under Sections 392 read v/ith Section 397, 324 read with Section 34 and 323 read with Section 34 of the i.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.i. for seven years and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo R.i. for five months, R.l. for six months snd fine of Rs.500/-, in defauit of payment of fine to further undergo R.i. for fifteen days and R.i. for three months and fine of Rs.500/-, (n defauit of payment of fine to undergo R.i for firtsen days.

¶37

¶38

By fiiing Cr.M.P.No.286/2008 appficant-Ravikant Sahu has chailenged para 36 of the judgment, whereby the triai Court has heid that father of the appiicant has not given Rs.1 iac to the Poiice and has further prayed for return of Rs.1 iac to him.

¶39

¶40

Conviction of appeilsnt Vikram Yadav is impugned on the ground that without there being any sota of evidence, speciaiiy evidence of identiftcation the triai Court has convicted and sentenced appeiiant Vikram Yadav as aforementioned and thereby committed iilegaiity.

¶41

¶42

As some unknov^n have per case of the prosecution, persons committed robbery after assauiting compiainant Nirmai Jain (P'W-3) by using deadiy Vi/sapons. F.i.R. has been lodged within ISminutes ofthe incident on 22.1.2006 against unknown persons vide Ex.P/16. On 27.1.2006 articies have been seized on the basss of disdosure statement of accused Ravlkant Sahu, present appiicant ViRram Yadav and other co-accused. One country-made pistoi and Rs.5000/- have been seized frpm the prssent appiicant. Accused were identified by the compiainant on 12.10.2006 vlde Ex.P/17. After compietion of investigation charge sheet was filed and finaiiy the trial Court by acquittjng other co-accused has convicted and sentenced the appeiiant as aforemenuoned.

¶43

S have heard iearned counsei for the parties, perused the judgment impugned and record of the triai Court.

¶44

Learned counsei appearing on behaif of appeiSant-Vikram Yadav submits that as per F.i.R. Ex.P/16 ths compiainant was not knowing the appeSiant, robber/ has been committed by thres persons, they were hoiding country-made pistoi and rod and committed robbery of

¶45

Cr.A.No.899/2007 & Cr.M.P.No.286/2008 Page3of4

¶46

Rs.2,50,000/- and present appeiSant has been idenmled on 12.10.2006 after iapse of more than nine months. As per F.i.R. the compiainant was not knowing the appeiiant, but as per para 11 of evidence of compiainant Nirmai Jain he vvas knowing the appellant by face and not by name because the present appeiiant used to coms io dairy of coaccused Ravi from whom the complainant has received money just before the commission of offence. Learned counsei further submits that co-accused Ravi has been acquitied on the ground of insufficiency in the identification and the present appeiiant is aiso entitied for acquittai on the ground of insufnciency in the identsfication.

¶47

¶48

On the other hand, iearned Pane'i Lawyer for ths State opposes the appeai and submits that the triai Court has rightiy convicted and sentenced the appeifant as aforementioned.

¶49

¶50

in order to appreciate the arguments advanced on behaif of the parties, i have examined the evidence sdduced on behaif of the prosecution.

¶51

¶52

As per para 1 of evidence of compfainant Nirmai Jain (PW-3), robbepy has been committed by three persons. Just before the robbery co-accused Ravi has given money to him. As per para 2 of his evidence he has seen the persons and has given description of the persons. He has specifically deposed that second person was committed robbery was appearing like the present appeiiant. in para 11 of his evidence he has specificaiiy deposed that he was knowing the appeISant by face and not by name because' he used to visit dairy of co-accused Ravi.

¶53

Para 11 of evidence of the compiainant cieariy reveais that the appeiiant v/as not knowing for him and was reguiar visitor of the dairy of co-accused Ravi, but this fact has not been mentioned in the F.i.R. Ex.P/16. The present appeiiant has been identified after more than nine months. Disciosure statement of the appeiiant and other co-accused shows their invoivement in more than one case.

¶54

As per para 2 of evidence of compiainant Nirmai Jain (PW-3), second accused was appearing iike the present appeiiant. if the compiainant was knowing the appeliant, then it was incumbent upon the

¶55

Cr.A.No.899/2007 & Cr.M.P.No.286/2008

¶56

Page4of4

¶57

compiainant to inform the poiice at the time of lodging of F.i.R. that the psrson who wss reguiar visitor of dairy of Ravi has aiso committed robbery, but reason best knov/n to the compiainant he has not stated the aforessid fact in the F.S.R., even he has not staied anything about co-accused Ravi from Vv'hom he has received huge amount just before the incsdent and was not unknown to the compiainant.

¶58

¶59

in order to convict the appeilant for the commission of aforesaad orfence, the proseeution is required to estabiish the identity of the appeiiant by cogent and reiiabie evidence, but the prosecution has faiied to adduce such evidence. in absence of such evidence conviction and sentence of the appeiiant as aforementioned are not sustainabie under the iaw.

¶60

Sn the present case, appiicant Ravikant Sahu has not ststed anything in his sxamination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. reiating to such dasm of Rs.1 iac, that too given by his father. Father of Ravikant Sahu has not fiied any petstion for return of such money. Applicant Ravikant Sahu is not entitied for recovery of aiieged money, however, father of Ravikant Sahu may institute civil suit against the person responsible.

¶61

Consequentiy, Criminal AppeaS No.899/2007 deser^es to be aiiowed and is bsreby aliowed. Conviction and sentence of appeliant Vikram Yacsav under Sections 392 read v/ith Seciion 397, 324 read wdh Section 34 and 323 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. are hereby set aside. He be set at iiberty. Fine if pasd by the appeSiant shail be refunded to him. Cr.M.P.No.286/2008 is Siabie to the dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

¶62

Sd/T.P. Sharma Judge

¶63

B/-

Ravikant Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikant Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rita Sharma Vs Devesh Das

M/S Alok Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

M/S Alok Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

Beetbala Maltiyar Vs Dinesh Kumar Sinha

Gunjuram Mourya Vs Smt.Ratani Bai

Sudarshan Sangari and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh