Chattisgarh High Court
Chapa Shanker vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 July, 2024
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
Neutral Citation
2024:CGHC:25088
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 1030 of 2003
Chapa Shankker s/o. Rangia Gond, aged 41 years r/o. Totta
Palli, PS Madded, District Dantewada (CG). ---- Appellant.
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through P.S. Madded, District Dantewada
(CG) ---- Respondent
(Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant. : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate.
For State : Mr. Ritish Giri, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
12-07-2024
1. This criminal appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 29-7-2003 passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Bastar Jagdalpur (CG) in Sessions Trial No.243 of 2002 whereby the trial Court has convicted the appellant for the ofence punishable under Sections 148, 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and ine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI 3 months under Section 148 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 04 years and ine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI for three months under Section 307/149 of the IPC, (both sentences are directed to run concurrently). Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:25088 2
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31-5-1999 Station House Oicer Madded Malkit Singh (PW/3) received information that a gang of naxalites were camping near village Lodhed. On such information being received, Malkit Singh along with staf of Police Station went to forest for patrolling. On 1-6-1999 when the patrol party was at the distance of 5 kilometers from the village Lodhed and when they were passing Hill, 10 to 12 Naxalites were seen in green uniform. When the patrol party attempted to arrest them the Naxalites opened ire and in turn Police party also opened the ire. The Naxalites started running away from the spot and thereafter the Police party started to chase them and succeeded to catch hold of appellant Chapa Shanker. Appellant was holding a muzzle loading gun (Bharmar) which was seized from him and thereafter Police party had registered ofence against the appellant and one Bhatti Shivaia.
3. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was iled in the trial Court against the appellant for the ofences punishable under Sections 148 and 307/149 of the IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. The appellant denied the charges and pleaded innocence. He claimed for trial.
4. The learned trial Court recorded the evidence of prosecution witnesses and on the basis of which, found the appellant guilty for ofences punishable under Sections 148, 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to undergo Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:25088 3 rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and ine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI 3 months for under Section 148 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 04 years and ine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI for three months for under Section 307/149 of the IPC, (both sentences will run concurrently) and acquitted the appellant under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms as the ofence under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act has not been proved, vide judgment dated 29-7-2003.
5. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment dated 29-7-2003 the appellant preferred this Criminal Appeal before this Court.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no any injured person in this case. FIR was registered against the appellant and other co-accused Bhatti Shivaia and other co- accused Bhatti Shivaia was acquitted by the learned trial court and the appellant was convicted under the aforementioned ofence. He further submits that concerned Police have seized only one gun from the possession of the appellant and only on the basis of suspicious appellant was arrested and ofence was registered against him. He further submits that the ofence was registered against the appellant under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act but the trial court acquitted the appellant under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act as the ofence under the said Section has not been proved, but convicted the appellant under Sections 148 and 307/149 of IPC. He further submit that he does not challenge the Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:25088 4 conviction, but considering the age of the appellant and as the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2003, learned counsel only emphasized that sentence may be modiied suitably as the appellant Chapa Shanker has already undergone six years and twenty days of jail sentence. Therefore, the sentence already undergone by him may be suice to meet the ends of justice. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Jaydev Shrichand Danani v. State of Gujarat reported in 1993 Supp (1) SCC 616.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant was on bail during the trial and after conviction of the appellant by the trial Court, the appellant was granted bail by this Court on 30-9-2003.
8. Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State strongly supports the impugned judgment and submits that there is no need to interfere with the sentence awarded by the trial court.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment of the Court below and record of the Court below with utmost circumspection.
10. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the trial Court after considering the materials available on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, has convicted the appellant for the ofences punishable under under Sections 148, 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and ine of Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:25088 5 Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI 3 months for under Section 148 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 04 years and ine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of ine to undergo further RI for three months for under Section 307/149 of the IPC, (both sentences are directed to run concurrently) and acquitted the appellant under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms vide judgment dated 29- 7-2003, I am of the view that the trial Court has not committed any illegality or inirmity in airming the conviction of the appellant for the ofences punishable under Sections 148, 307/149 and of the Indian Penal Code.
11. Now considering the question of sentence. As the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2003 and thereafter more than 21 years has been elapsed, considering the age of the appellant at present and further considering that the appellant Chapa Shanker has already undergone six months and twenty days of jail sentence during the trial and also considering the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant i.e. Jaydev Shrichand Danani (supra), there would be no useful purpose to again send the appellant in jail as he has already sufered undergone sentence and also agony of criminal trial for so many years. that meets the ends of justice. So this Court inds it appropriate to reduce the sentence from RI for 4 years under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to the period already undergone by the appellant as he has already undergone six months and twenty days while Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:25088 6 maintaining conviction under Section 148 and 307/149 of IPC. If ine amount is not deposited by the appellant, the same shall be paid within a period of one month from today, failing which the appellant shall undergo the sentence as has been ordered by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Baster, Jagdalpur (C.G.) under Sections 148 and307/149 of the IPC. Ordered accordingly.
12. The criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein-above.
13. Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Raju