HIGH CCURT OF C§~~H~IATTISGARH AT EILASPUR 158: Hon‘ble IRAr.T..F’.$harma,J‘1 Criminal Aggea! No‘ $63 of 2006 ~ PPELLANT ' Bodaram aiias Ramdharson of Buturam aged 'about 45 years caste Lohar resident of Chandargiri, Manajhipara, PaHce Station Darma, District Bastar- ass) VERSUS siate of Ch'namsgam through Ponce Station Darma, District Bastar. RESPONDENT i Shu‘ Vijay Deshmukh counsel forthe appellant Shti N.Nahaa Rey PL for the raspondent/State. \Cr'lmimzi xfmny i! NQ 3§é of EGDE m APPELLANT PaaKiumm son of Motluram aged about 3O years caste Lohar resident of Chandargiri, Manajhipara, Police Station Darma, District Bastar (CG) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh through Poiice Station Darma, District Bastar, RESPONDENT Shri-Ghanshyam Pate! counsel for the appellantQ Shri N.Naha Roy PL for the respondent/State. lORALl JUDGMENT l2.9.2008) Since both the aforesaid appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 31.3.2006 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdaipur in Sessions Trial No. 494/2005, they are disposed of by this common judgment. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 31 3.2006 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. ' 2. A —g‘ 8. Takaing into consideration the period of custody and the manner in which the incident took place, the sentence part ofthe judgment requires reconsideration. 9. Statements of the Witnesses and the materiai avaiiabie on record Show that the conviction of the appeliants under section 324/34 of the tndian Penal Code is just and proper and therefore the same requires to be sustained. v r 10‘ As regards sentence. the appeitants have already completed two years and 11“months of jail sentence and therefore, i am of the opinion that the period already undergone by them would be sufficient to meet the a a ends ofjusticel ‘ ‘er 11. Consequently, the appeals are partly allowed. The conviction of the accused/appellants under section 324/34 of the lndian Penal Code is maintained. However, sentence'of rigorous imprisonment of three years is reduced to the period already undergone by them. It is stated that they are in custody since 30.92005. They ’be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case. ' /’f’ \j set/- < T,P. SHARMA Judge