Vinod Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Vinod Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant's conviction and sentence under Section 307 IPC recorded in the judgment dated 29.03.2019 of the learned Sessions Judge, Janjgir (Session Trial No. 58/2018) warranted interference (reversal) by this Court.

Court's answer

On its own appreciation of the evidence and material placed on record (statement of the victim, the eye-witness, and the doctors), this Court concluded that the finding of guilt recorded by the trial Court is neither unreasonable nor contrary to the prosecution evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and is therefore not perverse, illegal or warranting interference by this Court.

Ratio / Principle

The instant criminal appeal stands dismissed on merit, upholding the appellant's conviction and sentence under Section 307 IPC.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRA No. 618 of 2019, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas; Order On Board dated 22/11/2024) — dismissed on merit. Criminal appeal by Vinod Bhardwaj against the judgment dated 29.03.2019 of the learned Sessions Judge, Janjgir, in Session Trial No. 58/2018, which convicted him under Section 307 IPC (R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, S.I. for 1 month in default). Prosecution evidence: victim Sunder Bai (PW-1) stated that on 15.01.2018 the appellant, her husband, assaulted her with a kudali causing head injuries; eye-witness Parmesh Khunte (PW-2) supported the prosecution case; Dr. K.K. Dahire (PW-8) found an injury of 10 x 2 cm on the occipital area of the head; Dr. Kumar Devasis (PW-10) found depressed fracture on the occipital bone and left temporal-occipital area and opined the injuries were grievous. Holding: on independent appreciation of the record, the trial Court's finding of guilt is neither unreasonable nor contrary to the evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and is not perverse or illegal warranting interference; the appeal stands dismissed on merit. Contextual note: pursuant to a direction of this Court, the Legal Services Authority's status report recorded that the appellant had already been released from jail on 17.10.2024 on completion of his sentence with benefit of remission, having suffered 5 years 6 months & 28 days out of the maximum 7 years.

1 / 2

2024:CGHC:45813

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 618 of 2019

1 - Vinod Bhardwaj S/o Ramvilash Bhardwaj Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Khisora, P. S. Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh

... Appellant

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

... Respondent

For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate.

For Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board

22/11/2024

This criminal appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.03.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 58/2018 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following

manner:-

Conviction		Sentence
U/s 307 of IPC	:	R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in
		default of payment of fine, S.I. for 1 month.

In compliance of direction issued by this Court, the Secretary, Legal

Services Authority has called status report from concerned Jail Superintendent wherein it has been mentioned that the appellant has already been released from jail on 17.10.2024 on completion of jail sentence awarded to him by the trial Court granting benefit of remission as he had already suffered 5 years 6 months & 28 days of jail sentence out of maximum 7 years as awarded by the learned trial Court.

Digitally signed by ARUN ARUN KUMAR KUMAR DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date: 2024.11.25 10:54:10 +0530

2 / 2

The prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant has examined victimSunder Bai as PW-1 wherein she has stated that on 15.01.2018, the appellant who is husband of the victim assaulted her by kudali due to which she sustained injuries on her head.

The prosecution has also examined eye-witness namely Parmesh Khunte (PW-2) who has also supported case of the prosecution. The prosecution has also examined Dr. K.K. Dahire (PW-8) who has treated the victim and found that there was injury of 10 x 2 cm. size on her head’s occipital area. The prosecution has also examined Dr. Kumar Devasis (PW-10) who has also treated the victim and found depressed fracture on occipital bone as also on left temporal-occipital and opined that the injuries were grievous in nature.

On the basis of evidence and material placed on record, the statement of the victim, eye-witness and the doctor, the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 29.03.2019 has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforestated. This Court has gone through the evidence and material placed on record and from the appreciation of the same, it is quite vivid that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be unreasonable and contrary to the evidence brought on record by the prosecution proving the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the finding recorded by the trial Court cannot be said to be perverse, illegal or contrary which warrants interference by this Court.

In view of the above, the instant appeal stands dismissed on merit.

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Arun