HIGH CGURT GF CHHATTISGARH A? EILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminai Apgeai N0! 260 of 2001 Mujaffer Khan and another APPE LLANYS VER$U$ $tate of Madhya Chhattisgarh RESP¢NDENT Shri Arun Kosher: caunsei far the appeilants.’ Shri Prawn Das, Dy. GA. far the State. . y , CRIMINAL AgpEAL uNE§ER SEé‘FIGN 374 Q2) (3F THE CGBE 6F CRIMENAL FRacEmiRE. £ ‘ J H £3 {1" M E N T {95.03.2a11) ‘ This appeaé is directed agam‘st the judgment and order dated 07.02.2001 passed by 2‘“ Additienai Sessians Judge, Raipur in $essi0ns Triai No. 59 0f 2000 canvicting the accusedfappeiiants under Secticns 324 and 324f34 cf IPC and sentencing both the appeilants t0 undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay fine of RS500 on each count, in default of gayment of fine t9 further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. 2 Brief facts of the case are that on GQ.D8.1§9§, FER Ex. P-4 was lodged by the compiainant Md. Arif Khan (PW-3) aiieging in it that he makes his living though auto-rickshaw and on that day the accused/appeiiant No.1 Muzaffer sat in his auto and asked, to take him to oid bus-stand but he refused the same. Thereafter the appeiiant abused him but the compiainaht went to $antoshinagar Chowk stand. After about 15-20 minutes the accusediapgeiiant No.1 came there aiong with his brother appeiiant No.2 and started hurling abuses to him and when he got down from his auto, the appeiiant NoJ. assaoited him on his chest by knife. {eased on this FER. offenee ender Seetioris 307f34 of IPC and 25 & 2‘7’ of — -2— Arms Act was registered against them and after compietion of investigation chalian was fiied on 1511,1999! Hewever; the Court below Framed charge against them under Sectians 307 of IPC and 25 ef‘ Arms Act. 3._ So as to held the accusedfappeiiants guiity, prosecution has examined 11 witnesses in support of its case. Statements "Qfithe accusedjappeiiants were aiso recerded under section 31%3 0f the Cede of Criminai Prececiure in which they denied thei‘Eharges ieveiied against them and pieaded their innacence and faise impiication in the case. A 4.? After hearing the parties the triai Court has acquitted the accusedjappeiiants 0t“ the offences under t3ections 307 of IPC and 2S 0t Arms Act but canvicted and sentenced them Fer the offence under Section 324 and 324,134 of IPC. 5. Heard counsei for the» parties and perused the materiai avaiiabie on record inciuding the judgment impugned. 6. Learned counsei for the appeliants submits that he is not pressing this appeai as far as it relates to conviction part of the impugned judgment and would confine his argument to the sentence part thereof only. ACCording to him, the incident had taken place more than 10 years back, that the appellants are middie aged persons having famiiy responsibiiities, that the appeliant No.1 has already remained in jail for about eight months whereas the appellant No.2 remained in jail for about two months and admittedly he had not made any assault on sthe complainant: no useful purpose would be served in sending them back to jail and it would be in the interest of justice if the sentence imposed on them is reduced to'the period already undergone by them. To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. -3- 7. Accordingiy, the appeal is part!y aliowed, Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained but iooking to the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular, the incident had taken piace more than 10 years back; that the appeiiants are middie aged persons having famiiy responsibiiities, that the appeiiant No,1 has aiready remained in jaii for about eight months whereas the appeiiant No.2 remained in jaii for about two months and admittedly-he had not made any assault on thej‘sComplainant, the Jail sentence imposed on them is reduced to th‘e period already undergone-t by them. However, in :Iieutthereof,‘the appellants are directed to pay a fine of Rs! 3{C3)(i0 each in addition to the fine amount awarded by the trial Coiurt totaling Rs.6,000 which would be paid to the complainantJinjured within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, If the fine amount as directed is not deposited in the trial Court within the stipulated period, the appellants shaii under go imprisonment for a period of six months, 8. Appeal thus partly succeeds. ‘ \waKe‘ ,I '