^ c^ ^/f° HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLBMR. T.P.8HARMA& HON'BLE MR. R. L. JHANWAR. JJ. APPLICANT/ APPELLANT NON-APPLICANT RESPONDENT CR3MINAL APPEAL (P.R.lNo 1440/2009 State of Chhattisgarh, Through the District Magistrate, District Sui^uja(C.G.). VERSUS Mazarul Haq S/o Sha&q Mohaiainad, Aged about -25 years, Occupation-Agriculturist R/o VUlage Bhanwrahi, Police Chouki Basdei, Thana Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.). CRIMINAL APPEAL FOR ENHANCEMENT OF SBNTENCB UNDER SECTION 377 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCBDURE. 1973. Present- Shri Ashish Shukla, G.A. for the State/appeUant. ORAL-JUDGBMBNT (Passedon 01/04/2010) The foUowme iudsanent of ttie Court was passed bv T.P. Sharma, J:- 1. This is a crimmal appeal for enhancement of sentence passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur ia Sessions trial No. 458/07 videjudgment dated 30/12/2008 whereby after holding fhe respondent giulty under Section 323 of fhe Indian Penal Code Court below has sentenced imprisonment for 2 months and 28 days (custodial period). 2. The sentence is challenged on fhe ground that Court below has not passed adequate sentence and has not convicted the respondent under Section 307 of fhe Indian Penal Code on fhe basis of evidence adduced on behaJf of the prosecution. 3. This criminal appeal has been preferred after 30 days of its Umitation. On due consideration I.A. No. 1 appUcation for condonation of delay in filing fhe cruninal appeal is allowed. Delay in filing the criminal appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Heard on admission. 5. Judgment impugned and copy of other documents specially the evidence perused. 6. According to the case of fhe prosecution and judgment impugned respondent has tried to crush fhe complainant by his vehicle aad caused 6 injuries but reasons best known to the coinplainant, complainant has refused to examine by Govt. Doctor. He was tried by private doctor but private doctor has refused to come in fhe Court for giving his eyidence, in absence of sueh evldence and circumstances leamed First Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur was not having any option except to convict and sentence the respondent under Section 323 of fhe Indian Penal Code, on over all assessment of the evidence and judgment, we do not fmd any case worth for admission. Consequentiy, this criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed at the stage ofadmission. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge