,<jT^ .?" /f Ii3^ y Appellant HIGH COURT OF CHHARTTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 157 ot_20QQ Sukh Sai, aged about 28 years, S/o. Bisunoraon, r/o. village Parkargaon, Police Station Patalgaon, Distt. Raigarh, now district Jashpurnagar. Versus Resppnde^nt State of M.P. now Chhattisgarh, Through: The District Magistrate. Criminal appeal u/S. 374 (2) ofthe Criminal Procedure Code (SB: Hon'ble IWr. Ranganath Chandrakar, J. '^ Present: Shri Varunendra Mishra, counsel for the appellant. Shri Sameer Behar, Panel Lawyer for the State. JUDGMENT (Delivered on this 28th day of July, 2009) 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3-1-2000 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Trial No. 220/94, whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.l. for four years. (2) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Sadhuram, the injured is a resident of village Parkargaon where the appellant also resides. On 26-5-1994 at about 9.00 a.m. when the injured was sitting in fron.t of Betel (Pan) shop of PW/5 Jugnu where PW/3 Anand, PW/4 Neel Sai and PW/2 Pitu (complainant) were also sitting, accused/appellant Sukhsai came there with axe (Tangi) and assaulted on the head of the injured as a result of which he fell down there. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the scene of occurrence. The persons '"-'^A B 1!K i ? ^ ESSiS present at Betel (Pan) shop brought the injured to his house. PW/2 Pitu lodged the FIR at Police Station vide Ex. P/2 and thereafter the injured was sent to Hospital for medical examination where Dr. J. Minj (PW/7) examined the injured and found a head injury caused by a sharp edged weapon as also a bony injury on the head vide his report (Ex.P-9). (4) After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the competent court which in turn committed the case to the Additional Sessions Judge. The AdditionalSessions Judge framed chargesunder Section 307 of the IPC. The accused abjured the guilt and pleaded his innocence and false implication. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after appreciation of the evidence available on record, convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. (5) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merit. However, he further submits that during trial, the appellant was detained in jail from 1-6-1994 to 21-10-1994 and from 28-10-1999 to 3-1-2000 and after pronouncement of the judgment also, he was detained in jail from 3*-1-2000 to 23-6-2003, therefore, appellant has already served the nnost of the sentence awarded to him by the trial court, therefore, the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 6) In oppugnation, learned counsel appearing for the respondenVState argued the case in support ofthe impugned order ofthe trial court. 7) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, 1 have perused the records of the trial Court and also the impugned judgment. On perusal of the impugned judgment, it is evident that the accused/appellant has already served the most of the sentence awarded to him by the trial Court. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, 1 am of the opinion that ends of justice would be served if the sentence awarded to the accused is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 8) For the foregoing, the appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial Court is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not, required in any other case. 9) The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall stand discharged. iiu Sd/- R'N-Cbandrakar w-