Badri Prasad and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally A signed by ANNAJEE A RAO ANNAJEE RAO

¶3

2025:CGHC:11878

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 845 of 2007

¶7

1 - Badri Prasad , son of Pirti Ram Sahu, aged about 25 years, resident of village Uchchbhithi, P.S. Kosir, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. (His appeal is dismissed as infructuous)

¶8

Pirti Ram Sahu, aged about 53 years, resident of village Uchchbhithi, P.S. Kosir, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Appellants

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Kosir, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Shri B. N. Nande, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Shri H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer.

¶13

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)

¶14

Judgment on Board

¶15

10/03/2025

¶16

1. The present criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of

¶17

2

¶18

sentence dated 25.08.2007 passed in Sessions Case No.92 of 2006 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Raigarh whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:

¶19

Conviction and sentence of appellant Badri Prasad Sahu

¶20

U/s 326 IPC	: RI for 7 years and fine of Rs.5000/- , in
	default of payment of fine, additional RI for 3 months

¶21

Conviction and sentence of appellant Pirti Ram Sahu

¶22

u/s 201 IPC	: RI for 3 years and	fine of Rs.2000/- , in
	default of payment	of fine, additional RI
	for 1 month.

¶23

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits that Appellant No.1 Badri Prasad had already undergone the entire period of jail sentence and later he has been released on remission, therefore, his appeal has become infructuous. In view of the above submission, the appeal of appellant Badri Prasad is dismissed as infructuous.

¶24

3. Now the appeal of appellant No.2 Pirti Ram Sahu remains for adjudication and is hereby disposed of. The allegation against the appellant No.2 Pirti Ram is that he has tried to cause disappearance of evidence of an offense or giving false information to screen the accused Badri Prasad.

¶25

4.1 The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 22.06.2006 complainant Damrudhar (P.W.1) lodged a report in Police Station Kosir regarding death of his mother Shyam Bai stating that on 30.05.2006 at about 7.30 a.m., his elder brother Badriprasad Sahu resident of Uchhabhatti picked a quarrel with his mother Shyambhai regarding partition of house and lands, and assaulted her thereby Shyam Bai sustained grievous injuries on head, left leg and on

¶26

3

¶27

31.5.2006, injured Shyam Bai was admitted in Sarangarh Hospital where Dr. (Smt.) J. Tripathi (P.W.8) initially treated her and advised to take the injured to Raigarh for better treatment. Dr. Smt. J. Tripathi had also informed the matter to the Police Station Sarangarh vide Annexure P-25. Injured Shyam Bai was admitted in Raigarh District Hospital for two days and thereafter looking to her serious condition, she was advised to take to Raipur Hospital. Damrudhar (P.W.1) and accused Pirti Ram did not take the injured to Raipur for further treatment, rather they brought back the injured Shyam Bai to their village Uchchbhati. Thereafter on 22.6.2006 injured Shyama Bai died. On information given by Damrudhar (P.W.1) the merg intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-1. Complainant Damrudhar has also informed the police that when shyam Bai was sitting in her house near hearth, then accused Badriprasad Sahu came with Tangi and assaulted her on head and left leg and further the incident was witnessed by the sisters Revati (P.W.2) and Nirmala (P.W.3).

¶28

4.2 The dead-body of the deceased was subjected to postmortem at Sarangarh Hospital and after examination, Dr. R.S. Sidar (P.W.9) gave report (Ex.P-20) according to which, the cause of death was was Coma due to head injuries caused by hard object. During the course of investigation, spot maps of incident were prepared by the Police and Patwari respectively and statements of witnesses were recorded. On the basis of memorandum statement (Ex.P-10) of accused Badri Prasad Sahu, Tangi was seized from him vide seizure memo Ex.P-11 and further clothes were recovered from him vide Ex.P-12 . After completing the investigation and on complying with other procedural requirements, the charge sheet was filed.

¶29

5. The prosecution has in all examined 14 witnesses and exhibited 28 documents to prove its case. The accused were examined under Section 313 CrPC wherein they pleaded innocence and false implication. After

¶30

4

¶31

conclusion of trial and considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material available on record, learned Trial Court vide impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned above.

¶32

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant Pirti Ram Sahu submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument only on sentence part. He also submits that out of the maximum jail sentence of 3 years awarded to him u/s 201 IPC, he had already remained in jail for about 7 months 27 days. He submits that the incident took place in May-June, 2006, since then the appellant is facing the lis and this appeal is pending since 2007 and now he is aged about 67 years. He further submits that the appellant is an illiterate person and there are no criminal antecedents against him. Hence, it is prayed that the sentence of the appellant under section 201 IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by him in the interest of justice.

¶33

7. Per contra, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant.

¶34

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment.

¶35

9. The allegation against the appellant No.2 Pirti Ram is that he has caused disappearance of evidence of offense or giving false information to screen the main accused Badri Prasad.

¶36

10. The inter-se relations between the parties are that deceased Shyam Bai was second wife of accused Pirti Ram. Accused Badri Prasad is son of the first wife namely Rambai. Complainant Damrudhar is the son of second wife Shyam Bai. Thus accused Badri Prasad happens to be the step son of

¶37

5

¶38

deceased Shyam Bai. The eye witnesses Revti (P.W.2) and Nirmala Kumari (P.W.3) are the daughters of second wife Shyam Bai. P.W.4 Gangotri Bai is wife of accused Badri Prasad and daughter-in-law of accused Pirti Ram. It appears that the dispute took place regarding partition of properties between the children of two wives, which led to the incident wherein accused Badri Prasad who is son of first wife assaulted Shyam Bai.

¶39

11. Having gone through the material available on record and the court statements of complainant Damrudhar (P.W.1), Revati (P.W.2) and Nirmala (P.W.3) which stood firm by medical evidence of Dr. R. S. Sidar (P.W.9) and Dr. Smt. J. Tripathi (P.W.8) this Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the Trial Court.

¶40

12. As regards the sentence of Appellant Pirti Ram, looking to the nature of allegations levelled against him and further considering the facts that the incident had taken place in 2006 about 19 years ago and the maximum jail sentence awarded to him is RI for 3 years u/s 201 IPC, out of which, as stated by learned counsel he had already remained in jail for about 7 months and 27 days and is facing the lis since 2006 and further looking to his oldage and considering the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against him, in the interest of justice and in the considered opinion of this Court, instead of again sending him to jail, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence of the appellant Pirti Ram from R.I. for 3 years to the period already undergone by him i.e. 7 months and 27 days for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC. However, the fine amount imposed against him shall remain intact. It is ordered accordingly.

¶41

6

¶42

13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove.

¶43

14. Appellant No.2 Pirti Ram is on bail. He need not again surrender in this case. His bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of the provisions contained in Section 437-A of the CrPC.

¶44

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

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶47

Rao

Badri Prasad and Another v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badri Prasad and Another 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

Nan Sai and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Umesh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Kolta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gopal Singh Gond Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramsurat Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jaynandan Vs State of Chhattisgarh