Partly allowed

Dawan @ Bhursa v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Feb 2025CRA/147/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court altered the appellant's conviction from attempt to rape and house-trespass for life imprisonment to outraging modesty under IPC Section 354. The sentence was reduced to the period already undergone in jail, and the appellant was kept on bail.

What did the court decide?

Conviction altered to IPC S. 457 and 354; sentence reduced to period undergone in jail; bail continued for six months.

Dawan @ Bhursa Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by BHOLA
NATH KHATAI Date:
2025.02.06 10:46:05 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:6396

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 147 of 2007

¶7

Dawanram @ Bhursa S/o Sadhuram Kalar, aged about 55 years, resident of Sitagaon, Thana Oundhi, District Rajnandgaon (CG)

¶8

... Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Oundhi, District Rajnandgaon (CG)

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

For Appellant : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. H. A. P. S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶14

Judgment on Board (04. 02.2025 )

¶15

1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.01.2007 passed by learned Special Judge, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Special Case No. 34/2006 whereby, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

¶16

Conviction	Sentence
U/s 450 of IPC	R.I. for 2years and fine of Rs.500/-, in

¶17

¶18

	default of payment of fine amount,
	additional S.I. for 2 months.
U/s 376/511 of IPC	R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs.500/- in
	default of payment of fine amount,
	additional S.I. for 2 months.

¶19

(Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently).

¶20

2. The case of prosecution, in short, is that, on 15.04.2006 at about 11:00 p.m., the complainant/prosecutrix was sleeping in her house along with her son Komal. At that time, the appellant entered her house, climbed on the cot on which she was sleeping, lifted her garments and caught hold her thigh. On suspicion, she pushed him back with her hands. She recognized the appellant in the light of a torch and started shouting thief-thief. On hearing her scream, her son and other neighbours came there and caught the appellant. Based on the complaint made by the prosecutrix, FIR was lodged against the appellant and after due investigation charge sheet was filed.

¶21

3. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the charges leveled against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. However, three witnesses have been examined by the appellant in his defence.

¶22

4. Learned trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, against which the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment.

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned trial

¶24

¶25

Court is absolutely unjustified in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offence as there was dispute going on between Halba and Kalar Castes, therefore, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that since the prosecutrix used to sell liquor, the appellant went to her house to drink liquor and on account of darkness, he touched the leg of the prosecutrix. Hence, if the entire case of the prosecution is taken as it is, at best, the offence under Sections 457 & 354 of IPC would be made out and, therefore, the conviction of appellant under Section 450 & 376/511 of I.P.C. may be altered/converted to Sections 457 & 354 of I.P.C. and the sentence imposed upon him be reduced to the period already undergone by him, as he has already remained in jail for more than 10 months 11 days.

¶26

6. On the other hand, learned State counsel, supports the impugned judgment and submits that prosecution has been able to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence and therefore, the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

¶27

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record including the impugned judgment.

¶28

8. The prosecutrix (PW-1) has stated before the court that on the date of incident at about 10:30 p.m. the appellant came to her house, lifted her Saari and Lahnga and caught her thigh. On suspicion, she lit a torch and recognized that it was the appellant. When she shouted thief-thief, her son and neighbours came there and caught the appellant. The husband of the prosecutrix Rai Singh (PW-5) has stated that her wife (prosecutrix) told him that the appellant had come to their house and caught her arm and hand. Similarly, Mangturam (PW-6) has also stated that the prosecutrix told him that the appellant caught hold of her arm and hand and did nothing else.

¶29

¶30

9. From the record it is also evident that there is a counter report lodged by the appellant against the complainant party. In the said counter report, it has been stated that the appellant had gone to the house of prosecutrix at night to drink alcohol because she used to sell alcohol and in the dark, his foot touched the leg of prosectrix. When the prosecutrix shouted thief-thief, the people of the neighborhood came there and beat him up. Both the reports have been lodged on the same date with an interval of one hour. Whatever the appellant has said in his statement recorded under section-313 CrPC, the same has been said by the defense witnesses.

¶31

10. The conviction of appellant has been made under sections 450 and 376/511 of IPC. Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code deals with house-trespass to commit an offense that is punishable by life imprisonment and section-376/511 deals with attempt to rape.

¶32

11. From the evidence available on record, it has been proved that the appellant had entered the house of the prosecutrix at night and touched her thigh, therefore, it would not be an attempt to rape but it would be an act of outraging the modesty of the victim which would fall under the category of section 354 of IPC. Since the offence under section 354 of IPC is not punishable with life imprisonment, the conviction of appellant would be under Section 457 of IPC instead of section 450 of IPC.

¶33

12. In that view of the matter, the conviction of appellant under Section 450 & 376/511 of IPC is altered/converted to sections 457 354 of IPC respectively and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him, as he has already remained in jail for about 10 months 11 days.

¶34

¶35

13. Appellant is on bail. he need not surrender, however, his bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of the provisions contained in Section 437A of the CrPC.

¶36

14. In the result, this criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein-above.

¶37

15. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted forthwith to the trial Court concerned, for information and necessary action, if any.

¶38

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶39

Khatai

Dawan @ Bhursa v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dawan @ Bhursa 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

Ramesh Kumar Pali and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jhumarlal Jain Vs Savanvati

Kamlesh Verma Vs Ghansyam Verma

Khilawan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Khikram Sahu