^p HIGHCOURT^F CHHATTISGARH :BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI T.P.SHARMA AND HON'BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR, JJ. APPLICANTS/ VICTIMS SSs-«s^ RESPONDENTS Cr.lVI.P.No.639of2010 1. Smt. Somprabha Divya Widow/o Late Shri Devish Divya, aged about 21 years. 2. Ku. Disha @ Vijeshwari Divya D/o Late Shri Devish Divya, aged about 2 years, Minor through her mother Smt. Somprabha Divya. Both R/o village Bhopsara, Police Chowki Maaro, Police Station Nandaghat Distt. Durg, at present residing at Vidya Nagar, Near Shiv Mandir, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station Nandghat, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 2. Hiralal Satnami.aged about 27 years, S/o Mehattar Satnami, 3. Maniram Satnami, S/o Mehattar Satnami, aged about 29 years. Both R/o village Bhopsara, Chowki Maro, Police Station Nandghat, Distt. Durg (C.G.) (At present respondents/accused No.2 & 3 are injail). APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF SPECIAL LEAVE UNDER SECTION 372 READ WITH SECTION 377 OF THE CODE OF CRINIINAL PROCEDURE Shri Ashok Swarnkar, counsel for the applicants/victims. Shri S.R.J.Jaiswal, PL forthe State/respondent No.1 ORALORDER (Passedon 07.09.2010) The following oral order of the Court was passed by T.P. Sharma, J. By this petition, the present applicants/appellants have sought for grant of special leave to appeal in terms of Section 372 read with 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that inadequate sentence •^-'•' /°.fwsk "^ r S-^^' i 3 'J®g%A. 1 ;i ~~"2sa-3g. | x ^ v/ •^ '^^^1' .^ ^^ ^^—^^i. ^' "i- imposed upon respondents No.2 & 3 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara in S.T.No.37/2008vide judgment dated 26.02.2010 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara has convicted both the respondents under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment forlive with fine of Rs.500/- each. 2. Present appeal has been preferred after 13 days of its limitation. I.A.No.01 forcondonation ofdelay in filing the appeal is perused. 3. Shri S.R.J.Jaiswa], Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the application. 4. On due consideration, I.A.No. 01 isallowed and the delay in filing thepetition is condoned. 5. Shri Ashok Swarnakar, learned counsel for the applicants/appellants submitted that Additional Sesslons has imposed the lesser punishment Gonsidering the facts of the case and the Court below is required to impose capital punishment i.e. death penalty to the respondents No. 2 & 3, therefore, for imposing adequate punishment upon respondents, present applicants / appellants have filed this petition for grant of special leave. 6. On the other hand, Shri S.R.J.Jaiswal, learned P.L. opposed the petition. 7. In the present case, learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the respondentsNo. 2 & 3 under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. andsentenced them to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.500/- each. Thus, the Court below has not acquitted respondents No.2 & 3 but has convicted them under Section 302 / 34 of the I.P.C. awarding sufficient punishment for imprisonment for life. The petitioners have filed this petition on the ground of inadequate punishment. We are of the considered view that the conviction of the respondents No.2 & 3 under Section 302 / 34 of the I.P.C. and the sentence awarded thereunder is sufficient. Therefore, the appeal on behalf of applicants/appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.02.2010 is not maintainable under the provisions of Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. /T-'"^ ;?• •<a ^ V, 3 8. The present victims are not competent to file appeal under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of the sentence on the ground of inadequacy. 9. Consequently, the present application for grant for grant of special leavetoappeal is not maintainable underthe provisions ofSection 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 10. Petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge