Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.10 14:26:15 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:31579

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 879 of 2025

¶7

Shivam Dubey S/o Shri Kewal Dubey Aged About 19 Years R/o P.O. And Village - Mahoi, P.S. - Sarwai, Distt. - Chhattarpur (M.P.), Present Address - Adarsh Nagar, Kushalpur, P.S.- Purani Basti, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.)

¶8

--- Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Purani Basti, Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

--- Respondent

¶12

For Appellant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L.

¶13

CRA No. 368 of 2025

¶14

Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu S/o Shambhu Das Manikpuri Aged About 21 Years R/o Near Raju Kirana Stores, Ramayan Nagar P.S. Purani Basti Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G. )

¶15

--- Appellant

¶16

Versus

¶17

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Purani Basti DistrictRaipur ( C.G. )

¶18

--- Respondent

¶19

2

¶20

For Appellant : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L.

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶22

Judgment on Board

¶23

09/07/2025

¶24

1 Since both the appeals have arisen out of the same impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶25

2 Both the appeals under Section 415 (2) of BNSS, 2023 have been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2025 passed by learned 12^th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.45/2024 whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under :

¶26

Conviction	S	entenc	e
	R.I. for 3	years	with fine of
U/s 326 of IPC	Rs.1,000/-, in	default	of payment of
	fine, additional	S.I. for	3 months.

¶27

3 The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 01.12.2023 at about 9 p.m., the appellants demanded money from the victim/injured Deepak Sahu to buy liquor. When he refused, appellant Shiva took out a tube of Solution and both the appellants applied the Solution on Deepak’s body and cloths. Then appellant Shivam took out a matchstick and lit it and set Deepak on fire. Deepak Sahu was immediately taken to Vaidehi Hospital, Bhatagaon, Raipur for treatment. A report being made in this regard, FIR was registered and after completion of investigation charge

¶28

3

¶29

sheet was filed against the appellants.

¶30

4 So as to hold the appellants guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses and exhibited 35 documents in support of its case. The statement of the appellants were also 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.

¶31

5 After appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, vide impugned judgment, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal.

¶32

6 Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he is not pressing the appeal so far as it relates to the conviction part of the judgment and would confine his argument to the sentence part thereof only. He submits that appellant Shiva is in jail since 03.12.2023 and appellant Shivam is in jail since 05.12.2023. The maximum sentence imposed upon the appellants is 3 years, out of which they have already served the jail sentence of about 1 year 7 months and 1 week. Fine amount has already been paid. Therefore, considering all these facts, the sentence imposed upon the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them and they may be released from jail.

¶33

7 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for appellants. He submits that appellant Shiva has two criminal past records.

¶34

4

¶35

8 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶36

9 Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of the injured Deepak Sahu (PW-1) his mother Tulsi Sahu (PW-3), witness Rakhi Sahu (PW-2), Dr. Dipesh Shah (PW-6) and the medical reports of the injured, the involvement of the appellants in the crime in question is clearly established. 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 326 of IPC.

¶37

10 As regards sentence, in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1977) 3 SCC 287 , Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that if you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries and held in para-9 as follows:

¶38

“9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 :

¶39

"The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it’. George Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by reculturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive

¶40

5

¶41

times. The human today views sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : “If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal Courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.”

¶42

11 In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellants is 3 years, out of which they have already served the jail sentence of about 1 year, 7 months and 1 week and also considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the appellants are youths aged around 20-21 years, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the appellants are sentenced to the period already undergone by them.

¶43

12 Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants under Section 326 of IPC is maintained but their jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by them i.e. 1 year, 7 months & 1 week. However, the fine amount is enhanced from Rs.1,000 to Rs.10,000, which shall be paid to the injured Deepak Sahu. In default of payment of fine, the appellants shall undergo RI for 6 months. If any fine amount has already been deposited by the appellants, it

¶44

6

¶45

shall be adjusted.

¶46

13 Consequently, both the appeals stand allowed in part to the extent indicated herein-above.

¶47

14 The appellants are reported to be in jail. They be released forthwith if not required to be detained in default of fine and not required in any other case.

¶48

15 Record of the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. A copy of the judgment may also be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent wherein the appellants are suffering the jail sentence.

¶49

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE

¶50

Khatai

Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiva Manikpuri Alais Bittu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyanarayan Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramdas Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Kosle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Sing @ Santosh Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivam Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

X Vs State of Chhattisgarh