In a criminal appeal, the High Court reduced the prison term for appellants convicted of grievous hurt to the period already undergone, citing their advanced age and the long delay, while directing them to pay compensation to the victims.
Sentence reduced to period undergone; fine compensation directed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Cr.A. No. 1075 of 2003
---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Prem Nagar, District Surguja (C.G.)
---- Respondent
Cause Title taken from CIS System
For Appellants : Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel along-with Shri Brijendra Singh, Advocates For State : Shri R.M. Solapurkar, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Judgment on Board
01.12.2022
-2-
| CONVICTION | SENTENCE |
|---|---|
| The appellant no. 2 Asharam appellant No.3 Sahasram, Appellant No. 4 Budhram have been convicted for the offence u/s. 326/34 of I.P.C. |
R.I. for 03 year with a fine amount of Rs. 800/- each in default of fine further to undergo R.I. for 02 months. |
| Appellant No. 1 Kunteram, appellant no. 2 Asharam appellant No.3 Sahasram, Appellant No. 4 Budhram have been convicted under section 324 /34 of the I.P.C. |
R.I. for 01 year with a fine amount of Rs. 200/- each in default of fine further to undergo R.I. for 01 months to all the Appellant. |
| Appellant No. 1 Kunteram, appellant no. 2 Asharam appellant No.3 Sahasram, Appellant No. 4 Budhram have been convicted under section 323 /34 of the I.P.C. |
R.I. for 03 Months in respect of victim ‘Dhankanwar’. All are sentenced for R.I. of 03 months in respect of victim ‘Jawahar’ with a direction to run all the sentences concurrently. |
complainant’s Sethram sister got the land on lease which has been given to her brother Sethram for cultivation. On fateful date of incident, complainant along with his sons were suing paddy. The accused have also sued paddy in the land on the pretext that half of the land belongs to them. When the crop was ripe for cultivating on the date of incident the complainant Sethram along with his son Niranjan wife Dhankunwar, Jawahar and other persons come to the spot at about 11 O’Clock when they reached home after cultivating then the accused Kunte with Axe, accused Sahasram, Budhram, Asharam came with Lathi’s(stick) and have chased Sethram for assault and when complainant was trying to run away then Kunteram has assaulted Sethram with Axe and other accused have assaulted them with Lathi’s. The accused Kunteram has assaulted Niranjan on the head other persons who have intervened in the matter have also been assaulted. The complainant lodged FIR (P/1) and after investigation the Police has registered the offence against the appellants for commission of offence under Sections 307, 323, 324 and 34 of I.P.C. The Police after investigation has submitted the final report
-3-
and charges were frame on 03/05/1995 for commission of offence under section 307,323, 324 and 34 I.P.C.
-4-
examination, he has admitted that Kunte has sustained injury on his head whereas Sahasram has sustained injury on the back and on the left wrist, Asharam has sustained injury on the back. Budhram has sustained injury on his back. He has further admitted that Niranjan was rotating lathi’s but he has denied that he has assaulted Kunteram with Lathi which has broken his finger.
-5-
Sahasram remained in jail for 02 month and 07 days and awarded sentence as detailed in paragraph-2 of the judgment.
-6-
already undergone sentences as mentioned. Now the appellant No.1 is aged about 73, appellant No. 63 years and appellant No. 3 is 68 years old, therefore, a lenient view may be considered and the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.
-7-
considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of
Altab Gharami @ Altab SK & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal.1
wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under :-
1 (2018) 13 SCC 512
-8-
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Altab (supra). I am of the considered opinion, that the ends of justice would be served, if the sentence of 03 years imposed upon the appellants by the trial Court is reduced to the period already undergone by them and also granting adequate compensation for the injury sustained by the victim.
Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge
-9-
Ashish
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellants should be revised considering their advanced age and the long passage of time.
Whether the appellants are entitled to reduced sentence and compensation in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Altaf Gharmi.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Altaf Gharmi & anr. Vs. State of West bengalFollowed¶9
(2018) 13 SCC 512 · Who else cites this
Altab Gharami @ Altab SK & Anr. Vs. State of West BengalReferred¶12
Altab Gharami @ Altab SK & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal.
Kunte Ram and others
State Of Chhattisgarh
Narendra Kumar Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
