^ ^1^^ ^. ^- StagleBench IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Cr.A.NO. 7>2>3 /200SrS.B.y Raju Chauhan S/o Asharam Chauhan, a^ed about : 25 years, Occupation : Welding Job, R/o. Ramnagar, Supela, P.S. Supela, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through : Police Station : Supela, District : Durg (C.G.) APPELLANT fIN JAIU RESPONDENT CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 f2) OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 Y^ (^ HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARM AT BILA8PUR SB : HON'BLB NR. JUSTICE PRITSNKBR DIWAKRR APPBLLANT RESPOMDBNT CR.A.NO. 733;2008 Raju Chaah.aj-i vei-Bus StateofC.Q. Shri Y.C.Shanna, couusel for fhe appe.Uanl. Smt. Smita Giiai, P.L. for the State. APPEAL U/8 374f2l OF THE CmMINAL PROCEDURB CQDE .JUDOMBNT jlO.OS.20111 - The' preseiit appeal arises out of the judgnient & order dated 30.07.2007 pa.ssed by the Xth Additional Sessions Jiidge (FTC), Durg 'in S.T.N.o, 67/2003 convicting the accused/appellant Ibr the olfence '•pu'ms.hable ti.iid.er Section 307/34 of tb.e Indiaii .Pteiial, C<xle aiid senteuciag him. to undergo rigorous iiiiprisoii33ieut for nine yeai-s ajid to pay fixie of :Rs. 3^000 .io. defau.it of pay.ment of fine to further undergo RI for SK m-onths. 2. Prosecution case in. briefis that o.n 8,9<02, at aboiit .10.00 p,.m., F!R (Ex.P/8) was lodged by Miliiid Sawarkar (P.W.-6) aUegmg tliat when fh.e victiia Ashwin . @ Pmta was sittisig m. his "faotdl, accused/appellaat, co-accused Sudama Yadav and Shibu. @ Shiv Kuniar assaiiMed him. by mean.s of sword.. kaife aiid cliib. TIie allegatioii agaiiist th.e acciised/appeUaiit is &.at he gave a. knife blow on the stoiaach. of the victmi a..s a resiilt of which. h,e siistam.ed grievous iajury, Based 011 this, offeace u-ader Sections 294, 506-IIy 324 & 34 IPC was registered a.gaiiist .all fhe three accused pe:raons, After in.vestigation, challao.was ffled o:a 18/1-0 <02 again.st ali the three accused persons undcr Sections 294, 506-11 &, 307/34 IPC. Co- accused SMbu (a), Stiiv Kuinar' was sliown as 'abaco-nder whereas accused/appellant Raju Chauhaii aiid. acquitted acciised Sudaiaa Yadav were tried by the trial Court. ^ ^ "'^ ^. ^B' 3, In' onler to establish tih.e guilt of tlie accused, fhe proseciition has examitied ten witnesses. Sta.fexnent ofthe accused/appeUaiitwas also recorded. under Section. 313 of tlie Cr.F>.C. in. which h.e deDied. the charges levelled agaio.st him aiid pleaded his .iniiocence eiid lalse izapUcation in. the case. 4. After tiearmg counsel for the p^rties, the tiial Court has acquitted the co-accused Sudama Yadav ofthe charge under Section 307/34 IPC but has convicte4 the present appeUaat under Sectk>ii 307/34 IPC arid seiitenced him as nientioiied above. Heiice'tliis appeal, 5. Heard counsel ibr fhe parties and penised the material available on record isicludiiig fhe impiigned judgme.nt. 6. Coiitention of Shri Sharm.a, cou.Bsel fbr the appellant is fb.at hc is no't pressirig this appeal on nierits aiid woiild conlio.e his argumeB-t on. sentence part tliereof only, He subm.its th.at tli.e appe^Uaiit is io. j^, smce 30.07.07 aad prior to that a2,so he rem.abied m jail fbr about 183 days thus his total. detentlon period cosxies to 4 years aiid 102 days» He. furfher submits that the appeflao.t is a youiig m.aa. of 29 years, has uo crim.iB.al backgroiind; belongs to a ver)r reputed femiJy., his d.eten.tion ia jail. w-ltli hardened ciimnials would afltect hi.m. adversely asid therefore his sentence ofRl forniae years be rediiced for the period already undergone by him, 7. On the other hand^ opposiag fhis subniiasiosi, it has been argued by Smt. Ghai,- State counsel that the manner m which the accused/appeUaiit has assaulted ftie victiin itselfshows the gravity of the offence, She farther subsnits that the victim was operated aad rem.alned ia, hospital for about. 11 days and th.erefore'no leiiiency be. shown to fhe appeUaat. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case aiid ttie subiziission as niade by counsel for fhe appeUant, his coiwiction under Section 307/34 IPC is maio.tamed. So far as fhe sentence part is concenied^ tlie appeUaiit is a youna maa of 29 years, has no -T^, .^ v "I g '•^.^•' ^""s"' criminal background; belongs to a very reputed faiaity, is io jait siiice 4 years & 102 days, "has ca-used oiity one iojury to fhe victiia, his sen.ten.ee is reduced to six years from. th.at of nir.i.e years. .However, m fbe niterest ofjusticey the amouiit offine is enlianced to Rs. 13 y000 from that of Rs. 3,000, The appellant would derive the benefit of this order only tfhe deposits fh.e fm.e aoiount ofRs. 1.0^000 before tJie trial Court which would be payable to tlie victmi-Asfawini @ Pmtii, Appeal. thus part-Iy succeeds. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge