c) ">^ -q ^- •»-» ICT'doOOOS7981 IH •EHE, HIGH COURI OF MM»YAPRaBESi SE JAB<aLEUR. • cslis.as, X'V'EM. so. €'SO_/9S i SPEL'ltWSS t-^t. ant.Vj.Ba. abai W/o Bedu. ageS 32 years. 2. ^t.aiiBaafcai W/o Ganesb Prasad Bbatt, aged 38 years. BGtfa servants, R/0 TAtoabar, Btpupara, BilaEipur. SSSQSBESS -vs- ! .' ! ' /. 8 Ibe State of AP dc'^e-m"^^.1 SBPEa.'VaDES. SECNON 374(2) Oi-THE CRIHEHA PBOeEWRE COBE^ •*<»- I1-! ..^•'^.•^.^, ^ ^ ^^ '/ //nl& i A- HI6M-CQURT_QF_CHyATTIS6ARH_AT BILASPU? Single Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritinker Criminat Appea) No. 650 of 1995 APPB.LANTS Smt.VimlcbaiA. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhottisgarh) Shri Vivek Chdpra, counsel for the appelisnts. Shri Vivek Sharma, Paie! Latoyer for the State. CRIMINAL APPEAt UN&6S SECTION 374 (2) OF THE COD6 OF OSIMIisiAL PROCBSUSE •Ul (05.05.2010) Present appea! arises out of the impugned Judgment nnd order- dcted 17.04.1995 passed by 5 Additioncl Sess'ons Judge, 8ilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 14&/94 conyicting the accused/appe!innts for the offences Dunishable undsr Sections 452 iS. 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo t'igor'ous imprisonnient for one year to each of them. ^oth.the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is 1+iat on 14.9.1993 c complaint was made by Kalpna yW-1) and or' which basis Rojnamcha (Ex.P-5C) was recorded by the police Station, Tarbahar cnd based on this entry in the Rojnamcha, F.I.R. (Ex.P-4) was registered in the Police Stction, Mahila Thana, Bitaspur on 16.9.1993. It Is aiieged that on 14.9.1993 there was mlnor dispute between son of app?ltont No. 2 Shimla and ssyn of the complainant, cs a result of which some dispute epoppe'fl-up between comp!ainan,t and the accused/appeiionts. It 'i.s furthgr alleged that th^Siccused/appellants hcve entered the house of the complainont and have assaulted her with harids and legs. After inysstigation, the challan was filed on 16.12.1993 for the offences punishbble.under Sections 452, 323 and 316 of the Indicn Pena! Code. . %^.."' • ."' "w^^' ..f" 11 .^ ^- Q /4 -\ 3. So as to hold to accused/appellants guilt/, prosecution has exomined as many as six witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accussd/appeilants were aiso recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Crimina! Procedure in which they denieci the charges leveiled against them and pieaded their iRnocence and false implication in the case. 4. After hearing the partles the trial Court has conyicted and sentenced the accused/cppetiants for the offences as mentioned aboye. Hence this appeal. 5. Heard 'counsel for the parties and perused 1+ie matena! available on record induding the judgment impugned. 6. Counsel for- 1+ie appeilont submits thot he is not pressing this appeal as far as it relates to conviction part of the impu9ned Judgment <xnd woulfl confine his argument To 1+ie sentence par-t thereof oniy. Accor'ying-to him, the appeltants are ladies, aged about 50 years, are the house wife, incident is said to have tnken ploce on 14.9.1993,incident had takeri piace on account of triviai issue and the appellants haye clready remained in jai! for about 7 dcys, and therefore theip sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by tiiem and no useful purpose wouid be seryed in sending them to jail. To this, counsei for the State has no serious objection. 7. In view of above, -tiie cppsai is partly ollowed. Convction part of the impugned Judgment is maintained. Appelicnts are reported to have remained in jail for a period of seyen days, the incident had taker^'/place aboutl7 years back, the fac.t that the appellants ar-e ladies; incident had^ occurred on account of trivial issue and, >>ti- th?refore, their sentence is reduced to the period olready undergone by them. However, the app?l!ants are directed to deposit fine amount of Rs.200 each in the Court below within a period of^v, four months-from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. \ 8. </ Aooeat thus Dartly succeeds. StilA Pritinker Biwa&er Judge