The court clarified that Section 397 IPC enhances punishment but is not a substantive offence, altering the conviction to Section 392 IPC.

CAV Judgment

The appellant in this appeal is challenging the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.11.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Jashpur in ST No.66/2007 whereby the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 4.2.2007 at around 8 pm when complainant Kamlesh Ram along with his family members was at his residence, one Ramraj Rautiya knocked at the door and when sister of Kamlesh Ram opened the door, Ramraj came inside and informed that party members have come to arrange a meeting in the village. Thereafter, father of the complainant went with Ramraj. However, after some time, two boys came with father of the complainant and claimed themselves to be party members. One of the boys was holding a country made pistol and another sword. These boys asked for country made pistol from the complainant’s father, on which he replied that it is deposited in the police station. Then one boy who was carrying country made pistol pointed pistol at the complainant and looted Rs.4000/- kept in the chest and also threatened his father and sister of life. While the accused persons were running away from there, the complainant, his brother Rajesh and other villagers chased them and caught one of them, snatched his sword and beat him. However, he escaped from their clutches and ran towards the jungle by taking advantage of darkness. On the information of complainant, Dehati Nalishi Ex.P/1 was registered and based on it, FIR (Ex.P/10) was registered. During investigation, statements of the complainant, Ramprasad and other persons were recorded. Spot map Ex.P/6 was prepared. From some distance ahead of the place of occurrence, one leather shoes, country made pistol, 315 bore empty cartridge and sword were seized. The seized pistol was sent for examination and report Ex.P/11 was obtained. The accused persons were arrested. They were subjected to medical examination in District Hospital, Jashpur and medical reports Ex.P/13, P/8, P/12 & P/7 were obtained. After completion of necessary investigation, charge sheet under Sections 458, 392, 34, 394, 397, 398 of IPC and Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act was filed against the accused persons.

03. Learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 458 , 397 of IPC and Sections 25 , 27 of the Arms Act against the accused which were abjured by them and they prayed for trial. In order to substantiate its case the prosecution examined 12 witnesses. Statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no witness was examined by him in defence.

04. After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court while acquitting accused Budhnath of all the charges by giving him benefit of doubt, convicted and sentenced the acc