Ranjlal and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.06.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.39/2011 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirdham (Kawardha) (CG) whereby the appellate Court dismissed the appeal while upholding the judgment dated 29.07.2011 passed in Criminal Case No.128/2011 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kabirdham (CG) whereby the present applicants were convicted and sentenced as under:-

¶20

2 / 4

¶21

Conviction	Sentence
For all the applicants for	R.I. for three months.
causing injuries to
complainant Laxmi Bai : under Section 323/34 IPC
For the applicants No.2 & 3 for causing injuries to Amilal under Section 323/34 IPC	R.I. for three months
Conviction of applicant No.1 under Section 324 IPC	R.I. for six months
For all the applicants: Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Tonhi Pratadna Nivaran Adhiniyam, 2005 (for short, ‘Adhiniyam 2005’) and Section 5 of the Adhiniyam. 2005	R.I. for six months with fine of Rs.300/- and in default to pay fine amount, further SI for 3 months each. R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.500/- and in default to pay fine amount, further SI for 3 months each.
All the sentences are or	dered to run concurrently.

¶22

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.09.2009 at 8:30 hours at village Chikhli when the complainant was going towards town to call the Doctor, on way at public well, the applicants called her to be witch ( Tonhi), abused her and started beating her with hands and fists. Hearing her screams, her husband P.W.2 Amilal came and they also assaulted him and threatened them to kill. Report of incident was filed by the complainant on 06.09.2009 itself and based on report F.I.R. vide Ex.P.4 has been registered against them. During investigation, spot map was prepared, statements of witnesses have been recorded and the applicants were arrested.

¶23

After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kabirdham. The applicants abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence.

¶24

Learned Court of J.M.F.C. Kabirdham, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, recorded the finding of conviction and sentence as mentioned in para 1. The said judgment was challenged by the applicants in

¶25

3 / 4

¶26

criminal appeal, however, the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 04.06.2012 dismissed the appeal while upholding conviction and sentence of the trial Court, as mentioned in opening paragraph. Hence, this revision.

¶27

Learned Counsel appearing for the applicants does not challenge the revision on merits but is challenging the finding of sentence part, which, according to her, is on higher side. She further submits that the incident is of 2009, they have no criminal antecedents and they are facing the lis since 2009, i.e. for more than 15 years. The applicants remained in jail from 14.09.2009 to 15.09.2009 and then from 04.06.2012 till 28.06.2012 and thus they incarcerated the jail sentence for 26 days and they may be sentenced to the period already undergone by them. She further submits that the fine amount has already been deposited in the concerned Court.

¶28

On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the revision while supporting the impugned judgment

¶29

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record minutely.

¶30

Considering the evidence of the complainant/victim (P.W.1), which was supported by the evidence of Amilal (P.W.2), Saadhram (P.W.3) and that of medical evidence of Dr. Smt. Usha Suryawanshi (P.W.7) coupled with M.L.C. reports vide Ex.P.10 and Ex.P.11 and further considering the material documents available on record, I am of the view that both the Trial Court as well as appellate Court were justified in convicting the applicants as such.

¶31

As regards jail sentence of the applicants, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, considering the fact that the applicants remained in jail for a period of 26 days and they are facing the lis since 2009, i.e., for more than 15 years and there are no criminal antecedents against them, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the applicants by the appellate Court, the jail sentence awarded to them is

¶32

4 / 4

¶33

reduced to the period of 26 days, which they already undergone. However, the fine sentence shall remain in tact. All the sentences shall run concurrently.

¶34

Consequently, the revision is allowed in part. The conviction of the applicants under the aforesaid sections is affirmed and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. Since the applicants are reported to be on bail, therefore, their bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months as per the provisions contained in Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE

¶37

Anjani

Ranjlal and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjlal and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Razaa Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sundaru @ Sundar Vs State Of C.g.

Yakub Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shahajada @ Shahjad Ali Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Brijpal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mittu Yadav and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh