Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
Shahid Imran, S/o Amanulla Khan - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through- Police Station - Respondent
CRA No. 64, 71, 171, 229 of 2003
Decided On : 25-04-2023
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections313 and 374 (2) - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 307, 148, 149, 395 & 397 - Sale of illicit liquor - Appeal against conviction - Whether there is anything inherently improbable or unreliable in their evidence - whether sentence awarded to appellants is appropriate or not -Held, offence under Section 397 of IPC is not made out, but the appellants are liable to be convicted under Section 395 of IPC. Thus, the conviction of the appellants under Section 397 of IPC, deserves to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside. The appellants are acquitted from the charges levelled against them under Section 397, but their conviction under Section 395 of IPC, is maintained - Appellants remained in jail during trial and also after conviction till this Court has enlarged them on bail - Considering that offence Section 397 of IPC against appellants is not made out and for commission of offence Section 307 of IPC sentence which can be awarded is for a term maximum sentence which may be extended upto 10 years and for offence under Section 395 of IPC which can be awarded imprisonment for life or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may be extended upto 10 years - No minimum sentence has been prescribed statute - Offence was committed in year at relevant time appellants were at young age between years have already lapsed and they are now middle aged persons - Appeal Allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. As common question of law and facts are involved in bunch of all the appeals, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. These appeals have been preferred by the appellants under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against judgment dated 06.01.2003 passed by Special Judge, Special Court [under Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989], Raipur (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 299/2000, wherein the said court convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-
| Conviction | Sentence |
| U/s 148 of IPC | R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 2 months. |
| U/s 307/149 of IPC | R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 6 months. |
| U/s 324/140 of IPC | R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 2 months. |
| U/s 395/397 of IPC | R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 6 months. |
| (All the sentences to run concurrently) | |
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.08.2000 Government Railway Police, Chouki Charoda received an information from informant that some persons who belong to liquor mafia are intending to sell illicit liquor near departure yard of railway. On the basis of information received, Head Constable- Matarulal sent two constables posted at chouki namely Yogendra Singh Parihar and Parmanand Bhoi, when they reached to departure yard, four persons had unloaded 5-6 cartons and after seeing the police, they left the liquor's cartons and ran away towards Bhilai by vehicle i.e. Metador. In the said vehicle, more liquor cartons were also kept. Thereafter, the constables had sent one person namely Chinna for informing the same to police chouki for calling vehicle. In the meantime, the accused persons namely Jaiyu, Fahim, Shakin, Bhaskar Rao and 6-7 persons came by Commander Jeep bearing registration No. M.P.-24-G-5759 with knife and stick and started abusing them, assaulted the police personnel. Accused Jaiyu, Fahim, Shakir assaulted Yogendra Singh on his stomach, rib and head by knife and accused- Bhaskar assaulted Parmanand Bhoi on his stomach by knife. Rest of the accused have assaulted the police personnel by stick, hands and fists. Both the constables made an attempt to escape from them then other person namely Iqbal, Ravi, Tuntun, came and uploaded the liquor and ran away from the spot. The said vehicle was driven by one Gurudayal Singh. The police reached there and on the basis of complaint lodged by constable- Parmanand Bhoi, Head Constable- Matrulal registered the FIR. Both the constables were sent to Durg hospital for treatment and subsequently, due to health condition, constable- Yogendra Singh was referred to Sector-9 hospital at Bhilai. The doctor on investigation found that the injuries sustained by constable- Yogendra Singh and constable- Parmanand were found serious in nature.
4. After completing all the formalities, charge-sheet was filed before the Railway Magistrate Raipur, who has committed the case to the learned Special Judge, Raipur, for trying the offence. On the basis of material collected by the prosecution, offence under Sections 148, 307/149, 324/140 & 395/397 was registered against the appellants. The learned trial Court framed charges, which was denied by the accused and plead innocent.
5. The prosecution, in order to bring home the guilt of the appellants, has examined witnesses namely constable- Parmanand Bhoi (PW-1), constable-Yogendra Singh (PW-2), G.P. Sharma (PW-3), constable- Ashutosh Sharma (PW-4), Md. Iqbal (PW-5), Dr. P. Balkishore (PW-6), Dr. S.R. Surendra (PW- 7), constable-Motiram Sahu (PW-8), Tuntun @ Jayvibhuti (PW- 9), Head Constable-Matrulal Chakravarty (PW-10), G. Shrinivas
1. The term ‘offender’ under Section 397 IPC is confined to the ‘offender’ who uses any deadly weapon and use of deadly weapon by one offender at the time of committing robbery cannot attract Section....
The court clarified that for conviction under Section 397 IPC, the prosecution must prove grievous injury and involvement of five persons, which was not established in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of members of an unlawful assembly under the Indian Penal Code, particularly the application of Sections 141, 143, 144, 146, and 149 ....
For conviction under dacoity, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt with corroborative evidence; mere identity of accused is insufficient without direct involvement in the crime.
The actual user of a deadly weapon during a robbery is solely liable under Section 397 IPC, while others involved may face lesser charges if not directly implicated.
Section 141 of IPC states that an “unlawful assembly” is an assembly of five or more persons, if their common object is to commit mischief, criminal trespass or any other offence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
