Baiju Singh and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Anusuchit Jati Kalyan, Thana, Bilaspur, (C.G.). (wrongly mentioned as Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur in the impugned Judgment).

¶17

... Respondent(s)

¶18

For Appellant : Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer

¶19

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

¶20

Judgment On Board

¶21

08/04/2026

¶22

The present appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the judgment of

¶23

2

¶24

conviction and order of sentence dated 23.04.2009 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Bilaspur (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No. 07/2008, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under-:

¶25

S. No.	Conviction			Sentence
1.	U/s. 147 of Indian Penal Code	R.I. each	for acc	03 – 03 months to used
2.	U/s. 341 of Indian Penal Code	R.I. each	for acc	01 – 01 month to used
3.	U/s. 294 of Indian Penal Code	R.I. each	for acc	01 – 01 month to used
4.	U/s. 336/149 of Indian Penal	R.I.	for 0	3 – 03 months to
	Code	each	acc	used
5.		R.I. with	for fine	06 – 06 months of Rs.500/- - 500/-
	U/s. 295 (A) of Indian Penal	each	, in	default of payment
	Code	of fi	ne	amount additional
		R.I.	for	03 months each
		accu	sed
6.	U/s.3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,	R.I. with each	for fine , in	06 – 06 months of Rs.500/- - 500/- default of payment
	1989	of fi	ne	amount additional
		R.I.	for	03 months each
		accu	sed
	All the sentences shall r	un co	ncu	rrently

¶26

As per the report received in pursuance of the bailable warrant

¶27

3

¶28

issued on 01.04.2025 against the appellants, appellant Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 8 have died. Accordingly, the present appeal stands abated in respect of appellant Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 8. Hence, the instant appeal is now being prosecuted on behalf of appellant Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 only.

¶29

As per the prosecution case, on 22.10.2007 at about 5:30 PM, during the occasion of Durga Visarjan at Village Paunsara, the accused persons, forming an unlawful assembly, are alleged to have assaulted the complainant, Krishnanand Suryawanshi (P.W.5), by means of lathi, danda, and stones, and also abused him in filthy and obscene language. The incident was subsequently reported to the concerned Police Station, and upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the appellants. The Learned Trial Court, having taken cognizance of the matter, framed charges against the appellants under the relevant provisions of law, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. In their defence, they did not examine any witness.

¶31

Learned trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, convicted the appellants and

¶32

4

¶33

sentenced them as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

¶34

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Trial Court is illegal, erroneous, and unsustainable in law, having been rendered on a misappreciation of facts and evidence on record. It is contended that the Learned Trial Court has failed to properly appreciate the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and has arrived at findings which are perverse and not borne out from the evidence on record. The evidence adduced by the prosecution is stated to be contradictory, unnatural, and unreliable, and suffers from material inconsistencies between the statements recorded during investigation and those deposed before the Court. It is further submitted that the Learned Trial Court has not considered the oral and documentary evidence in its proper perspective and has wrongly convicted the appellants, though the overall facts and circumstances of the case entitle them to acquittal. The impugned judgment is thus liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that there is neither any direct nor circumstantial evidence connecting the appellants with the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated without any cogent or credible evidence. It is also contended that no offence under Sections 452, 294 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, nor under Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is made out against the appellants. Without

¶35

5

¶36

prejudice to the aforesaid submissions, it is urged that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh and excessive in the facts and circumstances of the case and, therefore, deserves to be set aside.

¶37

Alternatively, it is submitted that in the event this Hon’ble Court is pleased to uphold the conviction of the appellants under Sections 147, 341, 294, 336 read with Section 149 and Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, as well as under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as recorded by the Learned Trial Court, then, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, a lenient view in the matter of sentence may kindly be taken. It is respectfully submitted that the incident in question pertains to the year 2007 and the present appeal has been pending since 2009. The appellants have already undergone incarceration for a period of about 09 days, and during the course of trial, they remained on bail and have not misused the liberty granted to them. In these circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that the sentence imposed upon the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶38

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State supporting the impugned judgment, submits that the learned trial Court after minutely appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants under Sections 147, 341, 294, 336/149 and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code and

¶39

6

¶40

Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Therefore, this appeal being without any merit, is liable to be dismissed.

¶41

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

¶42

It is borne out from the record of the learned Trial Court that charges were framed against the appellants under Sections 147, 148, 294, 336, 336 read with Section 149, 341 and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, as well as under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 22 documents. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the learned trial Court acquitted the appellants of the charge under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code; however, it proceeded to convict and sentence the appellants for the remaining offences, as detailed in paragraph 1 of the impugned judgment.

¶43

As per the prosecution case, the complainant is stated to belong to a Scheduled Caste and has produced a caste certificate marked as Ex.P/1. However, a perusal of Ex.P/1 reveals that it is a temporary certificate (अस्था�ईप्रमा�णपत्र), which is valid only for a period of six months from the date of its issuance, i.e., 26.11.2007. It is further evident from the record that the date of the alleged incident, as reflected in the FIR (Ex.P/18), is

¶44

7

¶45

22.10.2007, whereas the said caste certificate was issued subsequently on 26.11.2007, i.e., after the date of the incident, by the Naib Tehsildar.

¶46

11.While dealing with the issue where the caste certificate was issued after the occurrence of incident, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh observed in the matter of Babulal Patel Vs. The state of M.P. order dated 15.05.2024, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 648 of 2004 , held in paras 6,7 & 8 as under:-

¶47

The learned trial court has convicted the accused for the offence of Section 3(1)(x) of the Act and for this, reliance has been placed upon the provisional caste certificate of complainant, marked as Ex.P-2. It was issued

¶48

by Tahsildar on 18.12.2002 and contents thereof reveal that it was issued temporarily while the incident of the present case occurred on 8.12.2002, therefore, it is clear that this provisional caste certificate was obtained from Tahsildar after the date of incident.

¶49

The circular issued by General Administration Department of Madhya Pradesh Government dated 30.6.2001 with No.F.7-32/2000/s very relevant here because it came into existence prior to the issuance of provisional certificate of Ex. P-2 in this case.

¶50

8

¶51

This circular makes it clear that the practice of issuing provisional caste certificate is being stopped henceforth and only in exceptional circumstances, the provisional caste certificate

¶52

would be issued. Those exceptional circumstances have also been discussed in the circular itself and they are:

¶53

(1) for seeking admission in an education institute. (2) for applying for a Government job. (3) for appearing in an interview. (4) for applying in a Government scheme.

¶54

Under only these four exceptional conditions and that too when the caste certificate is required immediately. the provisional caste certificate was supposed to be issued; for it an application is duly supported with the affidavit and the reason of urgency was to be made. The circular further clarifies that the validity period of this caste certificate would be maximum six months and all such cases in which provisional caste certificate is issued shall be enquired into within the prescribed time frame and if the applicant is not found to be entitled to the certificate, his provisional caste certificate would be cancelled.

¶55

9

¶56

The above discussed circular was in enforcement when the provisional caste certificate of complainant, marked as Ex.P-2, was issued by Tahsildar This caste certificate was issued to prove the caste of complainant in a criminal case. Obviously, the purpose of issuing this provisional caste certificate was not covered under the circular of 30.6.2001. Thus, the learned trial court was in error in relying upon the caste certificate of Ex.P-2 which was issued in flagrant violation of the existing circular of Madhya Pradesh Government dated 30.6.2001. In the light of this observation, it is held that the caste of complainant was not duly proved in the case by any credible document.”

¶57

Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs.

¶58

Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 observed that the application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub- Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather that officer at Taluk or Mandal Level. This Court does not attract Section 3(1)(x) in this case.

¶59

10

¶60

13.Krishna Nand (P.W.-05), in his deposition before the Learned Trial Court, has stated that all the accused persons assaulted him and abused him by using filthy and caste-related language, pursuant to which the First Information Report came to be lodged against the present appellants/accused persons. Further, Ram Kumar (P.W.06), Pratap (P.W.-07), Shatrughan (P.W.-08), Shiv Kumar (P.W.09) and Shani Kumar (P.W.-10), in their respective depositions, have supported and corroborated the version of the complainant as deposed before the Court. However, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and upon a careful perusal of the entire record, it is evident that the caste certificate (Ex.P/1) has been obtained subsequent to the date of the alleged incident. Consequently, the prosecution has failed to satisfactorily establish that the complainant belonged to a Scheduled Caste at the time of the incident. In such circumstances, the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, are not made out against the appellants.

¶61

Dr. Sandeep Tiwari (P.W.-03), who conducted the medical examination of the injured witnesses (P.W.-04 to P.W.-16), duly proved the medical reports and deposed before the Learned Trial Court. His testimony lends due corroboration to the version of the complainant and other injured witnesses, inasmuch as the injuries noted in the medical evidence are consistent with the ocular testimony adduced on record.

¶62

11

¶63

The Learned Trial Court has meticulously appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence, including the medical evidence, and has rightly recorded the conviction of the appellants. The findings so recorded are based on proper appreciation of the evidence of the witnesses and are duly supported by the medical evidence on record. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants under Sections 147, 341, 294, 336 read with Section 149 and Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code is hereby affirmed. However, the conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is set aside.

¶64

As regards the sentence, considering that the incident in question occurred in the year 2007 and nearly 19 years have elapsed since then, and further that the appellants have already undergone incarceration for about 09 days, have remained on bail for a considerable period, and have not misused the liberty so granted, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the sentence awarded to the appellants under Sections 147, 341, 294, 336 read with Section 149 and Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶65

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellants under Sections 147, 341, 294, 336 read with Section 149 and Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code is hereby affirmed. However, the appellants are acquitted of the charge

¶66

12

¶67

under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. So far as the sentence is concerned, the same, as imposed by the Learned Trial Court for the aforesaid offences under the Indian Penal Code, is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by the appellants.

¶68

The appellants are reported to be on bail, therefore, their bail bond shall remain in operation for a period of six months from today in view of provision of Section 481 of BNSS.

¶69

The trial Court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action .

¶70

Sd/-

¶71

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶72

Saxena

Baiju Singh and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baiju Singh and Ors. 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

Rakesh Rai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deenu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Kumar Chauhan and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kurukshetra Mali Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dhananjay Barle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Maravi Vs State of Chhattisgarh