NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 847 of 2003  Vishwakarma Swarnkar S/o. Shri Ramswaroop Swarnkar, aged about 48 Years, Occupation- Labour, R/o. Krishna Nagar, Ganesh Chowk, Bhilai Tahsil & District- Durg (C.G.)

---- Appellant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh ----Respondent/State _____________________________________________________________

For Appellant : Mr. Aman Tamboli, Advocate appears on behalf of Jitendra Gupta, Advocate.

For State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A.

______________________________________________________________

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Judgement on Board

15.07.2024

1. This appeal is preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 29.07.2003 passed by Learned Special Judge, Durg, District-Durg (C.G.) in Special Case No. 15/2002, wherein the said Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under:-

2. As per case of the prosecution, the appellant and his wife (co-accused)

knew the complainant- Jeevan Lal (PW-04) since long, on 02.08.2000, appellant along with co-accused (his wife) went to the house of complainant- Jeevan Lal (PW-04) at Ayappa Nagar, Kohka, Bhilai Nagar. The appellant and co-accused gave assurance to the complainant that his brother- in- law namely Jaiprakash (PW-06) will get a job as they have good approach in higher level and in the name of job, the appellant and the co-accused demanded Rs. 20,000/- from the complainant and assurance was given to him as if he does not get a job, the said amount will be returned to him, then, for the sake of confidence, one agreement was executed by the appellant and his wife on stamp paper before the witnesses. When the complainant asked for job, the appellant kept moving the complainant repeatedly in the name of job, but he did not provide the job. Later, the appellant and co- accused used abusive language and said ‘do whatever you want’. The accused/appellant and co-accused also committed fraud with one Jairam (PW-5) by giving false assurance to provide the job and took money from him i.e., Rs. 30,000/-. Thereafter, Jeevanlal (PW-05) lodged the written complaint to Special Police Station- Durg as Ex. P/2. Later on, the FIR was registered at Special Police Station- Durg as Ex. P/4 against the appellant and co-accused. The prosecution after conducting the investigation, filed the charge-sheet before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. Thereafter, the matter was committed to the learned Special Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, Durg (C.G.) and the accused persons were put to trial for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 420, 420 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989).

3. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 08 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the charges leveled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.

4. The learned trial Court after hearing the counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant, as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that conviction of the appellant is bad, illegal and improper, the prosecution has failed to prove necessary ingredients of offence under Section 420 of I.P.C., the prosecution has not been able to substantiate the demand of Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- by way of giving job by the appellant to the complainant’s (PW-04) brother-in-