Partly allowed

Satish @ Bittu Shrivastava v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Mar 2024CRA/17/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant appealed against conviction and sentence for hurt, arguing for reduction of sentence. The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 325 IPC but reduced the imprisonment to the period already undergone and enhanced the fine to Rs. 3,000, partly allowing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Conviction under Section 325 IPC affirmed. Jail sentence reduced to period already undergone. Fine enhanced to Rs. 3,000 with 3 months SI in default. Bail bonds remain operative for 6 months.

Satish @ Bittu Shrivastava Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2011

¶5

Satish @ Bittu Shrivastava, Aged about 19 Years, S/o Prabhulal Shrivastava, R/o Vill. Asna, Nayapara, Near Hand Pump, P.S. Kotwali, Jagdalpur, Distt.-Bastar (C.G.).

¶6

---- Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate Jagdalpur, Bastar (C.G.).

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Appellant : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Judgment on Board

¶12

18.03.2024

¶13

1. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (henceforth ‘the Cr.P.C.') questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.12.2010 passed in Sessions Trial No.16/2009 by which the learned Sessions Judge (Atrocities), Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.) in, whereby the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under :

¶14

Conviction	Sentence	In Default of
		Payment of Fine
Under Section 325 of	RI for 01 year and fine	Additional RI for 01
the IPC	amount of Rs.500/-	month

¶15

2. According to case of the prosecution, on 11.08.2008 at about 02:30 PM, the complainant- Sonadhar was at the ‘ration shop’ and was having a

¶16

¶17

kerosene oil container. The appellant was also present there. The kerosene oil split over the appellant for which there was an altercation between the appellant and the complainant. During the course of altercation, the appellant abused the complainant naming his caste, threatened him of dire consequences also assaulted and thrown him nearby a cycle due to which, the complainant suffered injuries in his fingers of both hands and on face. Thereafter, FIR was lodged by the complainant (Ex.P/1). The complainant was sent for treatment at Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur and conducted medical examination (Ex.P/6). Statement of witnesses was recorded under Section 161 CrPC. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the police and the trial Court framed the charges aginst the appllant punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 325 of the IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act.

¶18

3. To prove the guilt of the accused/appellant, the prosecution has examined as many as 08 witnesses. Statements of the appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein accused/appellant has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter.

¶19

4. After completion of trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

¶20

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that he does not wants to press this appeal on merits and confines his

¶21

¶22

argument to the sentence part only. He further submits that the appellant was on bail during trial and he never misused the liberty granted to him by the trial Court. After conviction, the learned trial Court has released the appellant on bail to enable him to get an order from this Court. He further submits that the incident is of the year 2008. The appellant is facing lis since 2008. Therefore, it is prayed that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶23

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State/respondent opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant, supported the impugned judgment and submits that sentence awarded by the trial Court is just and proper and requires no interference.

¶24

7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the material available minutely.

¶25

8. Complainant- Sonadhar (PW-5) has stated in his examination-inchief that on the date of incident, he had gone to kerosene shop along with his child. While he was taking kerosene oil from the ration shop, some kerosene oil from his box fell on the hands of the appellant, the appellant got angry with the complainant. On this issue, the complainant said that he made mistake then the appellant used filthy language against the complainant and beat the complainant with his hand and fist. Complainant fell down due to that he suffered internal injuries on body and hands.

¶26

¶27

9. Castes certificate of the complainant has also been annexed with the case which is issued by the Office of Village Panchayat- Aasna, Janpad Panchayat Jagdalpur, District Bastar which shows that the complainant belongs to scheduled tribe category.

¶28

10. The victim/complainant was medically examined by Dr. Sanjay Basak (PW-7) he stated in his report that a swelling and pain was present on the left hand's little finger, a swelling and pain was present on the little finger of the right hand and a swelling on the left cheek and a swelling on the left elbow was present. He advised for x-ray by an Orthopedic Specialist. He opined that these injuries can also be caused by fall.

¶29

11. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this case is not being heard on merits but is being heard only on the sentence part. Further considering that the the incident is of the year 2008 and the appellant has already undergone about 10 days in jail out of the period of one year’s sentence imposed upon him by the trial Court, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the appellant under Section 325 of the IPC, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him and the fine sentence should be enhanced. Ordered accordingly.

¶30

12. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant under Section 325 of the IPC is affirmed and against the

¶31

¶32

conviction he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. However, the appellant is directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousands only) as a fine amount which shall be payable within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. In default of payment of the fine amount, the appellant shall liable to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

¶33

13. It is reported that the appellant is on bail. His bail bonds are not discharged at this stage and the same shall remain operative for a further period of six months in light of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.

¶34

14. Records of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this order forthwith for information and necessary compliance.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶37

Vasant

Satish @ Bittu Shrivastava v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish @ Bittu Shrivastava 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

Sonsai Gond Vs Munna Baiga

Ramkumar Chandravanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sandeep Agrawal Vs Raja Ram Tripathi and Anr.

J.P. Pandey (Died) Through Lrs. Vs Tarun Kumar Sharma

Dilip Kumar Rathore Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sheikh Surab Ali Mandal Vs Sheikh Sujat Mandal