Akhil Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1. This criminal appeal filed by the appellants-accused under Section 374 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (henceforth “Cr.P.C.”) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25^th March, 2022 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in Special Criminal Case SCST (PA) Act, 1989 No. 09/2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted for

¶18

2

¶19

the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 month.

¶20

2 . Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.02.2020, victim went to participate in the Narayanpur Marathon Race alongwith five boys and ten girls from her School alongwith her School Teacher and attended the Girls’ High School in Narayanpur. After the marathon race on the morning of 8^th February, 2020, all the participants were awarded Medals. Some of the victim's friends were not given their medals. Boys and girls from Rajnandgaon were also not given their medals. At that time, a conversation took place between accused Akhil Kumar Sahu and the victim. During the conversation, the victim asked for the name and address of accused/appellant No. 1 and obtained his mobile number. The victim also provided appellant No. 1 with her name and mobile number. From that day onwards, the victim and the accused started talking and they started liking each other. On the same month, when the Narayanpur fair was held, the accused Akhil Sahu talked the victim through mobile phone and invited her to Narayanpur Fair. The victim had gone alone to the Narayanpur fair. After visiting the fair with the accused, he dropped her at her home. On 8.4.2020, at about 12 O’clock, the appellant called the victim and said that, “I like you very much and want to marry you”. The appellant No. 1 asked her to be ready the next day i.e. 9.4.2020. Thereafter, he came in the victim’s village on a motorcycle with his friend (appellant No. 2 herein) on 9^th April, 2020 and called her to the road and when she refused to do so, the accused/appellants forcibly took her on motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 08 AM -2607 and went to Farasgaon and, when police stopped them, the appellant No. 1 called her ‘sister’ and

¶21

3

¶22

said that they were coming from Murkabhata, thereafter they stopped near the Manjhiathgaon forest, just outside Farasgaon. In the morning, when the police stopped and enquired him near the Keshkal checkpost, accused/appellant No. 1 made the excuse of visiting the Keshkal Hospital. Upon suspicion, they were stopped by the Police and informed to the family members of the prosecutrix, thereafter, the family of the victim brought her to Farasgaon police station. Mother of the victim had made written complaint (Ex.P-18). Based on which, FIR (Ex.P-19) under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC has been registered against the accused/appellants. During investigation, a spot map of the place of incident was prepared vide Ex. P-7. Statement of the witnesses were recorded. The victim was medically examined. Patwari map of the place of incident was obtained. Dakhil Kharij register (Ex.P-10) was seized pertaining to age of the victim and marksheet of class 7^th of the victim was also seized vide Ex. P-5. Motorcycle used in the incident was also seized from appellant No. 1 vide Seizure Memo Ex.P-9. Caste certificate of the victim was also seized vide Ex.P-2. The appellant were was arrested vide arrest memo (Ex.P-22).

¶23

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellants/accused under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3 (2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth, SC/ST Act) before the Special Judge (Atrocities), Kondagaon, District Kondagaon.

¶24

4. The Special Judge framed charges under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3 (2)(va) of the SC/ST Act and the same was read and explained to the appellants, who abjured the guilt and claimed trial.

¶25

4

¶26

5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses and exhibited 28 documents in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., in which they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in crime in question. No defence witness has been examined in support of the appellants / accused.

¶27

6. After completion of trial, learned Special Judge vide its impugned judgment dated 25.03.2022 acquitted both the appellants of the offences under Section 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, however, convicted them for the offence under Section 363 of IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, with default stipulation. Against which, instant appeal has been preferred.

¶28

7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the judgment impugned.

¶29

8. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the accused/appellants submits that he is not pressing this appeal as regards conviction part of the impugned judgment and would confine his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. He further submits that the prosecutrix herself has admitted in para 4 & 5 of her deposition that accused persons were in her contact since two month and she went with them on her own will without any threat or pressure. He submits that in instant case appellants have remained in jail from 11.04.2020 to 08.06.2020, thus, they have already served jail sentence for about 60 days, hence, interest of justice would be served if the jail

¶30

5

¶31

sentence awarded to the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶32

9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the state has not filed appeal. She further submits that in view of the prayer made by counsel for the appellants, appropriate order may be passed.

¶33

10. Though, counsel for the appellants is not pressing their appeal on their conviction part for the offence under Section under Section 363 of the IPC, despite that if the evidence of victim (PW-1), her brother-in-law (thtk th ) (PW-2), her elder sister (PW-3), her brother (PW-5), her mother (PW-6), Constable - Temanlal Sahu (PW-8) and Assistant Sub Inspector- Smt. Rukmani Mandavi (PW-9) is seen, then from their uncontroverted deposition, it is proved that on the date of incident i.e. 9.4.2020 in the night appellants were taking victim by abducting her and they were caught by ASI – Smt. Rukmani Mandavi (PW-9), Constable – Temanlal Sahu (PW-8) and their team, while they were going towards Rajnandgaon in a motorcycle, thus, offence of abduction of victim is very well proved from the evidence of aforesaid witnesses, therefore, conviction of both the appellants for the offence under Section 363 IPC is hereby affirmed.

¶34

11. So far as sentence part of impugned judgment is concerned, having considered that fact that appellants were caught after few hour of the incident; both of them are resident of tribal District Bastar, therefore, keeping in view the facts & circumstances of the case and the fact that appellants/accused persons have served out the jail sentence for the period from 11.04.2020 to 08.06.2020, thus, they have already served jail sentence for about 60 days; this court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in sending them further to serve out the remaining jail sentence and

¶35

6

¶36

interest of justice would be served if they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them.

¶37

12. In the result, the criminal appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment against the appellants is maintained, imposition of punishment of fine is also maintained but jail sentence imposed upon them is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶38

13. The appellants are reported to be on bail. Their bail bond shall remain in force for a further period of six months as per the provisions contained in Section 481 of the of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶39

14. Record of the Special Judge alongwith a copy of this judgment be sent back forthwith for compliance and needful.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)) Judge

¶42

AMITKUMARDUBEY Digitally signedby AMITKUMAR DUBEYDate:2025.10.1309:10:44 +0530

¶43

amit

Akhil Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhil Kumar Sahu 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

Premchand Bhansali Vs Manohar Lal Sinha

Haricharn Ramteke Vs Barsati Lal Dhruv

Satyanarayan Singh Thakur Vs Smt. Champa Ueke

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs Fool Singh Dugga

Sonlal Turi @ Bhagwan Puriha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Maniram Sonwani @ Bablu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh