Partly allowed

Naresh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Feb 2025CRA/365/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court clubbed three appeals challenging conviction and sentence for offenses under IPC Sections 489-A, 489-B, and 489-C. While affirming conviction, the court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone in jail based on the 18-year lapse, keeping the fine intact and continuing bail.

What did the court decide?

Sentence remitted to the period already undergone; fine maintained; bail continued for six months.

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by SOURABH SOURABH PATEL PATEL Date: 2025.02.25 18:14:02 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:9424

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 365 of 2007

¶7

Naresh Kumar S/o Tanke Chauhan, Aged about 30 years, R/o Banirao Para, Raigarh, District and Police Station Raigarh.

¶8

--- Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through-Police Station Baloda, DistrictJanjgir-Champa (C.G.).

¶11

--- Respondent

¶12

CRA No. 371 of 2007

¶13

Ganesh Das Manikpuri S/o Samaru Das, Aged about 22 years, R/o Village-Baloda (Bazar Para), P.S. Baloda, District-Janjgir Champa, (C.G.).

¶14

---Appellant

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Balouda, District-JanjgirChampa (C.G.).

¶17

--- Respondent

¶18

CRA No. 499 of 2008

¶19

Krishna Kumar S/o Shri Vishram Bharati, Aged about 25 years, R/o Bhaistara Village, P.S. Baloda, District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.).

¶20

---Appellant

¶21

Versus

¶22

State Of Chhattisgarh Through:- P.S. Baloda, District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.).

¶23

--- Respondent

¶24

: For Appellants Mr. Neeraj Mehta, Advocate in CRA No. 365 and 371/2007. Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate in CRA No. 499/2008. For Respondent/State : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, P.L.

¶25

¶26

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board

¶27

24/02/2025

¶28

1 Since all the appeals have arisen out of the common impugned judgment dated 12.04.2007 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), in Session Trial No. 133/2006, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

¶29

2 The appellants namely Naresh Kumar in CRA No. 365/2007, Ganesh Das Manikpuri in CRA No. 371/2007 and Krishna Kumar in CRA No. 499/2008; have preferred these three appeals under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, calling in question the validity, legality and correctness of the impugned judgment dated 12.04.2007, whereby they have been convicted and Sentenced as under:-

¶30

Conviction	Sentence
	R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.
U/s 489-A of the IPC	5000/-, in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for 01year.
	R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.
U/s 489-B of the IPC	5000/-, in default of payment of fine
	amount additional R.I. for 01year.
	R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.
U/s 489-C of the IPC	5000/-, in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for 01 year.
	(To each of the appellants).

¶31

(All the sentences were directed to run concurrently)

¶32

3 The case of the prosecution is that on the date of the incident i.e., 14.02.2006 at about 12:05 am, the co-accused Krishna Kumar & Rajendra Kumar were going towards Baloda from Bilaspur by auto-rickshaw at that time the police party was also on patrolling and the accused persons stopped by the police party and after

¶33

¶34

inquiry search was made then, some fake currency notes and one adopter, lead wire, mouse, mobile etc. were found in their possession. Based on the memorandum of the co-accused Krishna Kumar, the present appellants namely Naresh Kumar and Ganesh Das were made an accused in this case. Thereafter, a case has been registered against the present appellants at Police Station under Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C and 489-D of IPC.

¶35

4 During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined as many as 18 witnesses and exhibited 30 documents. The statement of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case and have examined 03 witnesses in their defence.

¶36

5 After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.04.2007, learned trial Court has acquitted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 489-D of IPC and convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeals.

¶37

6 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submit that they are not pressing the appeals so far as it relates to the conviction part of the judgment and would confine their argument to the sentence part thereof only. According to them, the incident is said to have taken place in the year 2006, and thereby more than 18 years have rolled by since then. At present, the appellants namely Krishna Kumar (A-1) is aged about more than 43 years, Naresh Kumar (A-2) is aged about more than 48 years and Ganesh Das Manikpuri (A-3) is aged about more than 40 years and the appellants namely Naresh Kumar (A-2) and Ganesh Das Manikpuri

¶38

¶39

(A-3) have already remained in jail for about 03 years 02 months and Krishna Kumar (A-1) has remained in jail for about 03 years 04 months and no useful purpose would be served in again sending them to jail, therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon them may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶40

7 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for appellants.

¶41

8 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record including the impugned judgment.

¶42

9 Having gone through the material available on record and the evidence of the witnesses Ganga Singh Dhru (PW-4), Suryakant Shukla (PW-12), J.T. Nanda (PW-14), Kheekh Das (PW-15), Sadhna Singh (PW-17), establish the involvement of the appellants in the crime in question. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 489-A, 489-B and 489-C of IPC.

¶43

10 As regards sentence, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the incident had taken place on 14.02.2006 about more than 18 years ago and the appellants namely Naresh Kumar (A-2) and Ganesh Das Manikpuri (A-3) have already remained in jail for about 03 years 02 months and Krishna Kumar (A-1) for about 03 years 04 months, this court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served if they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them.

¶44

11 In view of the above consideration, I do not feel it appropriate to send back the appellant to jail. Hence, the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by them instead of suffering rigorous imprisonment for 07-07 years for the offence punishable under

¶45

¶46

Sections 489-A, 489-B and 489-C of IPC. However, the fine amount imposed upon the appellants by the trial Court shall remain intact.

¶47

12 The learned trial Court at para 36 of his judgment has recorded that the currency notes of Rs. 3,21,000/- were seized from the house of accused Naresh Chauhan and in this regard the defence witnesses Nityanand Patel (DW-2) and Niti Chauhan (DW-3) have narrated that the said amount was received in lieu of land transaction and in fact, the currency notes belonged to the family of accused Naresh Chauhan, therefore, when the appeal was not filed within the stipulated time, thereafter the currency notes should be refunded to the father of accused Naresh Chauhan. Since the appellant-Naresh Kumar's father has died, as stated by learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, the said amount would be given to the appellant Naresh Kumar.

¶48

13 Consequently, the appeals are allowed in part to the extent indicated above.

¶49

14 Appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall continue for a further period of 6 months as per requirement of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.

¶50

15 Record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this judgment forthwith for information and necessary action, if any.

¶51

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE

¶52

Sourabh P.

Naresh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh Kumar 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

Ajay Prasad Soni Vs State of Cg

Ghasiya Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhagauram Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Parmanand Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhojuram @ Bhajju Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganesh Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh