CF0000064168 Sing'e Bench (' - (r-^i.3l) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR Cnmina 1" -1 C.. 1. Ap-oeal N,o.''.^A-3 of 2000 Appellants (on bail): 1. Ttondaram, sonof Kriparam Sahu, (A-4) aged 36 years, .r\^ ..^'^ <^y\.. ly\f..'''" ., :,../-ty . 'l ^: - .'.' ' J -ss'-gj» (A-5) 2. Teganram alias / Ramsharan, son of Godam Sahu, aged 32 years., (Both residents of Village Bilari, PS Shivri Narain, District Champa-Janjcfir (MP) Versus y Non-applicant: The State of M.P. through Police Station, / Shiv- y rinarayan, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (MP/) CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: \ \, XI-HC-78 sn^T^TR-fieb traT3Tl^Tsti*iiqi ..fS'XSSs ^^^ v^^ 11^11 \;,'^\ ^s'°_/^,'l lv\a!.\."" ^f.s,'//. 3^ "yi^ld-il, »Ti1*<'i6, Rtdi^y ~"p1 ,ft.A...AS%^.;|^2< ttl^ldl sh^llch ••"••'•'••••••^^•^/-^p:[ 200 aii^i ^ach ('iqtd'is.fl) ?Tcn'W(Tf?cT3TI^ PROCEEDINGS QFtOK AftALAT OF TKB HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGA toH, BILASPUR (C.G.) ! Justice Suall Kumar Sinha, -Lb 03.03.2007 This order shaU disposf (MQan Kuinar and others vs Appeal No. 1339/2000 fThan Chhattisgarh), Criminal Appe; State of Chhattisgai-h) & Crimi State ofClihattisgai'h). Shri Gautaia Khetrapal, Appeals alongwitli tiie appell Kumai', Santii, Tliandaram, stated tliat appeUants - Tegnu; No.2 m Crimuial Appeal No. pendency of fhis appeal on 2 identified by Shri Gaulam Kl certified in flie order sheet. Coniplainsuits/victiins i CIihotelal Suryavanslu, who ai qTOfe^ qiiRififte^t rfsRsn: ^arf^Tsn^T 'k Adalat. of Criminal Appeal No. 1329/2000 |. Stafe of Chhattisgarh), Criniinal (darain and others vs. State of ^l No. 1370/2000 (Yogesh Sahu vs. fial Appeal No. 1473/2000 (Saiitu vs. fidvocate appeai's in all the Cnininal \ants namely Yogesh Sahu, Milan phogsai aad Shambhunath. Tt is ^am @ RamshaKMi, who is appellant (339/2000 had expired during tlie >p'.4.2006. Al) fhese appellants arc Ijieti-apal, Advocate, which shall be (amely Siyaram Suiyavanshi and |' the real brothei-s, are also present P.T.O. \ (^) XI-HC-78 3ST STPTTcPT, (SiTfly'Ko, fsldiyy ^I^MI g^n^ fii- t^^ll^^.0.0. "•<--//- ^ 200 Sii^i 4at*> (lil=lf^sl^) ?ni?r w f^TR; aqTan^Tgw^ 5TBTW trf??T SIT^T 2L along with their counsel nam submits that he personally Let a certification to thisl Shri Aran Sa.o, Govt. Ad^ Criiiiinal Appeds. All these 4 Crimuial Apj Adalat on the basis of I.A. Nd; Crimuial Appeal No. 1329/200p flled in Criiainal Appeal No.13.1; No.471/2007 ffled in Nos.478/2007 ajid 472/2(p No. 1473/2000, by which, bo|t persons and the compounduig flie offences, ii} convicted hy flie Court below to compound the same. Apai't frora this, I.A. Ni() 489/2007 and I.A.490/2007 4 uader Sectigw.32Q(5) 6f%e GJ) Criminal appeals pi-ayjng for ])> ili the above 4 pending Cniiiui^' A pei-usal of the i-eco|] No.63/96 would show that f Sahn, Milan Kiimar, Santu, T11 Oodam, Bhogsai and Shauibhi^ i|ely Shri Rakes1-i Sahu. Shri Sahu r k:n4ws the complainants/victims. lefTcct be done in the order sheef. I'ocate appeaj-s for the State in all tiie coniplainants^victinis) Wiffeft^ iinRft''ff teA; ^srRTiTan^sT beals have been refen'ed to the Lok [s.476/2007 and 473/2007 filed in ), I.A. Nos.477,/2007 and 474/'2007 [!9/2000, T.A. Nos.475/2007 and I.A. Appeal No. 1370/2000 and I.A. R07 fileri in Crimiaal Appea] th the parties (appellants/accused have sepai~ately prayed for which, fhe appellants have heen torl also for giviiig them pennission ).491/2007, I.A. No.488/2007, I,A. ave also been separately filed toSay )de of Criininal Procedure in a1l fhe lermission to coropoiind the offence 1 Appeals. rd of the Special Cnininal Case accnsed pei-sons namety Yogfsh andarain, Tegnuram @ Ramsharan, nath were tned by the Special Conrt P.T.O. \\, XI-HC-78 HWWI Sh*11<h 3^ -^WM^, W-^V'16, faf«l«y .fcA:..!.^.'2-.lLZ,2P(2- •'" ^TT 200 3ii^i >iach (yid11!^) sn^T^iTR.fi'* OTT3iR7Ti.h1|sti c ^ SRiTWCTfstrsn^T (Scheduled Castes and Schedi Act), Bflaspur. Accused - tiie Criniiiial Case itself. Othel llie said Coiirt under Section 4 accused/appellant namely Y) Secfion 323 ofIPC aod for Sec) to undergo R.I. for l-lyeaj' aq default of payment offine to ^ and for Section 323 ofIPC, acc) sentenced to uadergo R.I. for| sentences wei-e directed to nj jiidgnient of conviction aiid ^ tliese appeals, fo which, flie botli fhe parties for conipoundi|! We have personally ei us regaiiding flie coinpromise. They have accepted the have coiuproinised the case sa^ want that tl^g accused persons | HoweVer, tu abundan1| statenients of botli' fhe victiml' Clihotelal Suiyavanshi. The conviction under Set for causing loss and dainages whereas, conviction under SecDion ^rofcrfl^ wqrfffr'te^t rf^rezrc ^aTRiITSd^ST (iled Tnlies {Prevention of At'ocit.ies} Godjun had died during the pendency of j- accused persons were convicted by ^27 ofIPC 011 28/4/2000. However, Vbgesh was also convicted under (ion 427 of IPC, they were sentencerl i|d to pay a fine of Rs.500-500/-, in ^iii'ther undergo R.I. for 2-2 inonths |ised/appellant—Yogesh was fiirther 5-5 nionths ui 2 counts asid tiie jn concun-ently. It is against this 'ntence, fhe appellants have filed a^iove applications have heen filed by hs tlie offences. •nqi^ired froni the parties present hefore ^oniproniise aiid expressed that fhey id tiie complainants/victims do not should be sent to jaU in this niatter. cautioa, we have recorded the i|s nainely Siyaj^iin Surayanshi and ^tion 427 of IPC has been awarded to the propei-t;' ofvictim - Siyaram, 323 ofIPC has been awai1ded for P.T.O. "\ \. '-t^- XI-HC-78 *11HMI 9WI^> T5? •^Wlvlil, »Tf)«'is,f«ii'ii«y<' ,.a..e..'...i^^J^°? ^ 200 W^,f\ W* (^I'K^T) 3TI^T^rf?lN7 gmaT^TCTR? ¥R(TWHf?3W^T 4, tb causing Ivirt to SiyaKun as w( coinpoundable under Section| whom flie hurt is caused, in whom the loss or damage is ca( Since we are satisfied th; comprouiise and all the parti^ deceased/appellant - Tegnura^ii Cnminal Appeal No. 1339/20(p0 therefore, we pennit feern consequence tliereof, we allow| proper to drop fhe piioceeding^ basis ofcomposition ofthe oflej Section 320(5) and 320(8) ofC4 The proceedings of all diiopped on fhe basis ofj persons/appellants are acquitl IPC respectively. So fai- as fhe accused/jii No. 1339/2000 namety Tegiiur^u ane satisfied on tlie basis ofl fliemselves fhat he had expired] of fhis appeal and since no been filed, fherefore, we decla) grouiid of non-substitution aft(j date of expiration. q^fcPftT WRft'^'fe^t rf^R: ^;3rrf^IT3TI^t 'n as Chhotelal. These offences ane 320 of Cr.P.C. hy the pereoiis to case of Section 323 of IPC and to asetl, in case ofSection 427 ofIPC. hat tlie parties have entered into a °s appearing befoi-e us, except tlie @ Ranisharan - appellaat No.2 in I, have accepted the compromise, compound the oflTences and in fheir coinpromise and we deem it \s of these Cnminal Appeals on tfie |ices under Section 320 (1) read with I.P.C. |tlie 4 Criminal Cases are hereby couiposition and the accnsed |ed under Sections 323 and 427 of d/jippeUant No.2 in Cruiuiial Appeal c^in @ Ramsharan is concemed, we evidence of coniplamants/victims ]on 27/4/2006 diinng the pendency ejpplication for his substitiition has i)fe his appeal to be abated on the jr fhe period of one mon.th fi'om the P.T.O. \\ :-S3 XI-HC-78 HTfl^ll Sb^icft 73t '^wwf, »Tfl*f'ie,Ridi+iy —^ /Yl-.rt - ^ )z, ZcfJ-^^00 q^ ..^L..i,......'.^..-..^.~2Qo 3T]^TqCT[<^fct) (PITSn^Tstiliqi ll-!tjll\ ^ K"^ 1 Sjj €5»;). //jj ,-w' /<?// ^au-"-' 7<-y :^—"se-i.'7 J'h^f^ 3<l^i |4ach (^gfg^ST) ?T(ITW:;Erf?(T3n^T f Accoi-dingly, all fhe Crin the basis ofcomproinise entere^ The deposition sheets ri=j< original order shaU be kept No. 1329/2000 and the photodf the records ofother 3 Criuiina] .. ^._^^Y^.\ cu- ^ Member - Lok Adaist Hiah Court of Chtiamsgai 81LASPUR 'MiFci'fl-i M[^'nl'ifte^<|ai«i< ^aif^ITSlT^T ^inal Appeals stanrl disposed of on |? into Tieftveen f.he parties. coi-ded by tlie Lok Adalat and this in thc iiecord of Criminal Appeal apies of this orrier shall be kept in Appeals. Sd/- j - - ^- °7- (Jusiice SuRit Ksimar Sinha) MBmbcr-LokAdalat Higl-i Goun of Chhattisgarh ' BILASPUH :'»- -^ws ia^S——s'aiWa"nSN si.:;^:l.