Anil Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1611 of 2025

1 - Anil Kumar S/o Late Mehattar Ram Kosle, Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward No. 03 Guru Ghasidas Chowk, Magarlod, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶5

... Appellant

¶6

versus

¶7

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶8

... Respondent

¶9

For Appellant : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, P.L.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board

¶11

02/03/2026

¶12

1 The present appeal has been filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Circuit Court, Kurud, Dhamtari (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No. 42/2020 whereby the learned Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:-

¶13

Conviction	Sentence
	Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years
U/s 307 of IPC	with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount additional
	R.I. for 3 months.

¶14

2 The prosecution's case, in brief, is that during the Nagar

¶15

Digitally HEERALAL signed byHEERALAL SAHUDate: SAHU 2026.03.02 17:47:03 +0530

¶16

2

¶17

panchayat election, Bedram Kosle, brother of the appellant/accused, was a candidate for councillor (Parshad) and lost the election. The appellant/accused abused the complainant, saying that you people did not cast the vote for my brother, and since then, the accused had a grudge against the complainant. On 07.06.2020 at about 10:30 am, when the complainant Pawan Kosle (PW-1) was standing in front of Tahir’s Shop, at that time, the appellant reached there and due to the previous enmity, he picked up a empty liquor bottle, abused the complainant and threatened to kill him and hit him with the bottle, due to which the complainant sustained injury on his left cheek and jaw. The complainant was admitted in Government hospital, Magarlod. On the basis of the complaint, FIR was registered and after completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant. Thereafter, charges were framed for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506 Part-II and 307 of IPC.

¶18

3 So as to hold the appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 31 documents. The statement of the appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.

¶19

4 After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.03.2023 learned Judge has acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 294 and 506 Part-II of IPC. However, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal.

¶20

5 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that she is not pressing the appeal so far as it relates to the conviction

¶21

3

¶22

part of the judgment and would confine her argument to the sentence part thereof only. According to her, the incident is said to have taken place in the year 2020. The appellant was in jail from 09.06.2020 to 29.01.2021, from 07.02.2023 to 09.02.2023 and from 10.03.2023 till date i.e. 3 years, 7 months and 15 days. The appellant is aged about 42 years, he has no criminal antecedents, and he is still serving the jail sentence; therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him and he may be released from jail.

¶23

6 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for the appellant. However, submits that the appellant has no criminal antecedents.

¶24

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

¶25

8 Dr. Sharda Thakur (PW-9) conducted the MLC of victim Pawan Kosle (PW-1), and gave his report vide Ex.P-30. As per MLC report (Ex.P-30) the following injuries were found:1. a incised wounds measuring 6x4x1/2 cm in the mandibular region on the left side.

¶26

a incised wound measuring 1x1/4 cm in the upper part of the forehead on the left side.

¶27

a swelling measuring 4x3 cm in the occipital region at the back of the head.

¶28

Dr. Sharda Thakur (PW-9) opined that all the injuries were caused by a hard and blunt object. And the nature of the injuries to the victim was serious.

¶29

9 Having gone through the material available on record and the evidence of the witnesses Pawan Kosle (PW-1), Mohd.

¶30

4

¶31

Tahir (PW-2), Chameli Kosare (PW-3), Bhagwat Sahu (PW5), Navin Chandrakar (PW-7), G.S. Rajput (PW-8) and Dr. Sharda Thakur (PW-9), establish the involvement of the appellant 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 appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC.

¶32

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:

¶33

“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 :

¶34

"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 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

¶35

5

¶36

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.”

¶37

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 appellant is aged about 42 years, the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 5 years, out of which he has already served the jail sentence of 3 years, 7 months and 15 days, no criminal antecedent of the appellant is recorded in the arrest memo, he has studied upto 4^th class and he is a labour, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would serve if the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him.

¶38

12 Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 of IPC is maintained, but his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. 3 years, 7 months and 15 days. However, the fine imposed by the learned trial Court shall remain intact.

¶39

13 Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated herein-above.

¶40

14 The appellant is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case.

¶41

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 appellant is suffering the jail sentence.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE

¶44

H.L. Sahu

Anil Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar 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

Raja Yadav @ Lucky Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Krishna Kumar Chandra Vs Smt. Anita Chandra

Gulshan Taigor Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh