HKSH COORT OT CHia&TTISGARH. BHASyQR APPELLANT: (InJail) RESPONDENT: CrimliiaIAi>i>ealN6.3aiof20@5 Pawan Kumar Gabel, alias, <VicklQ?>, S/o Keshav Prasad Gabel, aged about 23 years, Permanent R/o ViUage Adil, Thana Malkharod, Distt. Janjgir (C.G.), Present Address: Near Cooperative Bank, Sitapur, Thana Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Versus State of CIihattisgaTh, Ttirougiti P.S. Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) \ {Criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) offhe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973} Present: Mr. Kunal Das, counsel for the appeUant. Mr. SushUDubey, Govt. Advoeatefor fheState/respondent. Stiuide Beack: Hoa'ble BIr. T.P. Skarma, J ORALJUDOIUBNT (2-7-2009) 1. By fhis appeal fhe appeUant has chaflenged legality & propriety of the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 30-3-2005 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ambikapur in Sessions Trial No. 155/2004, whereby leamed Additional Sessions Judge after holding fhe appellant guilty for commission of offence under Section 333 ofthe I.P.C., sentenced him to undergo R.L for seven years & pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment offineto further undergo R.I. for fwe monfhs. 2. I have heard leamed counsel for the parties and perused tiie impugned judgment as also record offhe trial Court. 3. Case of fhe prosecution, m brief, is fhat Ganesh Prasad Chaudhary (FW-4), Principal/Public Officer & Controller of Exams, wtiile discharging his duty on 5-5-2003, found use of unfair means during fhe exammation against fhe appellant and Ganesh Prasad (PW-4) dttected for prepara.tion of case against fhe appellant, whereupon fhe appellant assaulted him with iron weapon used for banging the bell. F.I.R. was lodged vide Bx.P-14 UO, ^ft and spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-15. Ganesh Prasad (PW-4) was examined vide Ex.P-20. His temporal bone was found fractured vide X-ray & report Ex.P-13. > 4. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was fiiled before fhe ChiefJudicial Magistrate, Aittbikapiir, who in tiim committed the case to fhe Court of Sessions^ Ambikapur^ j5roin where leamed Additional Sessions Judge received fhe case on transfer for torfaL 5. In order to prave fhe gmlt of fhe appellant, tfae prosecution has exaiained as many as nine witnesses. Statement ofltie appeflant was recorded under Section 313 ofthe Cr.P.C. in whieh he denied the circuinstances appearing against him, pleaded innocence and false impUcation. The appellant also adduced the evidence of defence witnesses namety Yogesh Kumar Gupta (DW-1) & Staarad Pradhan (DW-2). Virtualty, they have not deposed anyfhing relatmg to commission of offence or their presence at fhe time of offence. 6 After affordmg opportunily of hearing, lesfftied Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentericed the appellant in fhe aforesaid manner. 7. Leamed counsel for fhe appeUant submits fhat he is not disputing the conviction of the appellant, but onty assailing fhe sentence. He further submits fhat the appeUant is a student and when he was caught red handed with unfair mescns, he lost his temper and coflOtmitted the aforesaid offence and caused single uiji.uy to the Principal. Leamed counsel also submits fhat fhe sentence awarded to fhe appeUant is exasssive and not iri consonanee with the act committed by him. 8. On the ofher hand, leamed counsel for ftie State/respondent supported fhe impu^ied judgment. 9. By adducing fhe evidence ofBhota Ram Bhagat (PW-2), DUeshwar Ram Bhagat (PW-3), Ganesh Prasad Chaudhary (PW-4), S. Tiwari (PW-5), Ashok Kumar Paikra (PW-6), Dr. M.K. Jain (PW-7), Ruben Minj (PW-8) - Sub Inspector & Dr. K.K. Dutta (PW-9), the prosecutiori has proved fhe fact fhat fhe appeUant has assauited the Public Olfieer wtule he was dischargmg his duty as a Public ^^ Soina Of&cer and caused grievous injiiry resiilted iirto fracture of temporal bone whieh is punishable under Section 333 of fhe I.P.C. IO.AS regards fhe question of sentence, admittedty fhe appeUant is a student and at fhe time of commission of offence he was aged about 23 years. On fhe spur of fhe moment when fhe appellant was caught red handed, he assaulted fhe Public OflBeer wtth fhe weapon whichwas present near the place of incident aad caused single injury. The appeUant was in custody during trial from 12- 1-2004 to 9-3-2004 and Irom 30-3-2005 i.e. fixim the date of judgment till today and has completed more fhan 4 years 4 monfhs of fhe jail sentenee. ll.Taking into consideration fhe age of the appeUant, the m^uier and fhe circumstances in which he has committed the oflfence, sentence awarded to fhe appellant requires consideration. 12. Consequently, fhe appeal is partly altowed. Gonvic^ion of fhe appellant under Seetion 333 of ttie I.P.C. is maintained, however, sentence of 7 years R.I. & fine of Rs.1,000/- is reduced to sentence of 4 years 4 months (aht;ady undergfflie). The appeUant be set at liberty forthwifh, ifnot required in any other case. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge