@@ 1N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE A'r BILAsPUR CHHATTISGARH CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /3 / 0 12003 Chandan S/o Rajendra Sao “Aged about 18 years , R/o. Near, Papular Cycle Store, Contractor colony RS. Supela Distt. Durg (C.G.) APPELLANT n VERSUS g VkESPONDENT The State of Chhattisgarh KV r Through P S supela D1stt Durg (C G ST No 275/2000/ A 14 ) ‘ Offence U/s. 307/34 of I.P.C. ‘ / CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 12! OF THE CODE OF ~. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPU (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminal Appeal No. 1310 of 2003 Chandah APPELLANT VERSUS RESPONDENT State of Chhattisgarh. Shri R.K. Jain counsel for’the appellant. - Shri Ashish Gupta PL for the respondent/State. u f CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 I2) OF THE CODE 0I= ‘ CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. £ . JUDGMENT (13.01.2011) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.11.2003 passed by the Additionai Sessions Judge, Durg in Sessions Trial No. 275/2000 convicting the appellant under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years. 2. Case of the prosecutiOn in brief is that on 8.1 1 .1999 FIR Ex. P-7 was registered on the basis of Dehati Nalisi (Ex. P-6) given by the victim namely Santosh PW—10 alleging that on 7.11.1999 co-accus'ed Sonu came to his house and made a request to accompany him to a place where some quarrel was taking place. When they reached the place of incident, accused/appellant was returning after the quarrel was over and then some altercation took plaCe between him and the complainant In whICh accused/appellant gave him a knife blow on his stomach as a result of which he sustained Injuries After Investigation challan was filed by the police on 1 11 1991 for the offences under Sections 294 506 (B)/34 and 307IPC However the trial Court framed ‘ the charge against the accused/appellant under Section 307/34 IPC only. 3. So as to hold the accused/appellant gu1lty, prosecution has examined as man as 12 Witnesses In support of Its case Statement of R N . ‘ y the accused/appellant was also recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. 4. ‘After hearing the parties the trial Court acquitted the accused/appellant of the charge under Section 307 but convicted and sentenced him as mentioned above; v 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on recordincluding the judgment impugned. 6. Counsel for the appellant submits that hei'is not pressing this appeal asdar as it relates to conviction part of the judgment impugned and would confine his argument to the sentence part thereof only. He submits that as the incident had taken place in the year 1999 and that the accused/appellant has already remained in jail for a period of one year and three months whereas the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence allegedly committed by the accused/appellant is one year and six months, no useful purpose would be served in again sending him to jail and it would be in the interest of justice if the sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. This prayer of the counsel for the appellant is however opposed by the State cosel. 7. In view of above, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the; impugned judgment is maintained. However, keeping in view the fact that as the incident had taken place in.the year 1999 and that the appellant has already remained in jail for a period of one year and three months whereas the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence allegedly committed by the accused/appellant is; one year and six: months, in the interest of justice sentence imposed on him is réfduced to the period already undergone by him. 8. 1 Appeal thus partly succeeds. l Sd/— Pritinker Diwaker Judge un