2025:CGHC:58365 The date The date The date when the judgment is uploaded on when the when the the website judgment is judgment is reserved pronounced Operative Full - 02-12-2025 - 03-12-2025 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 280 of 2008 Bhagwat Yadav, S/o Dujram Yadav, aged about 28 years, R/o Village Nirtu, Thana Sarkanda, Tah. & Distt. Bilaspur (CG)

... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Vijay K. Deshmukh, Advocate.

For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Sahu, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, J Judgment on Board (02^nd December, 2025)

The appellant in this appeal is challenging the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 28.2.2008 passed by the Special Judge {Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act}, Bilaspur in Special Criminal Case No.03/2008 whereby he stands convicted & sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 294 of Indian Penal SI for one month.

Code.

Under Section 325 of Indian Penal RI for 01 year, pay a fine of Code. Rs.500/- and in default to suffer additional RI for 03 months.

Under Section 3(1)(x) of RI for 01 year, pay a fine of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Rs.500/- and in default thereof to Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) suffer additional RI for 03 months.

Act, 1989.

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that pm 9.11.2007 when complainant Mohitram Suryavanshi (PW-1) was at his home, the accused was abusing him filthily in the name of his mother and sister, which was objected to by the complainant and others present there and they drove him away. However, on the same day, when the complainant was standing near a cart at around 4-5 pm, the accused abused him filthily in the name of his caste also and made repeated assault on him with a club as a result of which he sustained injuries over his right hand and head. The incident was witnessed by PW-2 Shyamcharan, PW-3 Ramswaroop and PW-4 Rajaram. On the written report of complainant Ex.P/1, he was got medically examined by Dr. Chaturbhuj Mishra (PW-5). Thereafter, FIR (Ex.P/6) was registered. During investigation, spot map was prepared vide Ex.P/2, caste certificate (Ex.P/3) of the complainant was seized, the club from the accused was seized and statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completion of usual investigation, charge sheet under Sections 294, 325 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (in short “the Act of 1989”) was filed against the accused followed by framing of charges accordingly by learned trial Court which were abjured by him and he prayed for trial.

03. In order to substantiate its case the prosecution examined 9 witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. In his defence he examined two witnesses.

04. After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. Hence this appeal.

05. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and as such liable to be set aside. Learned trial court failed to appreciate that identification of the seized articles in this case is doubtful. The injuries suffered by the complainant are lacerated wound and simple in nature. He submits that all the material witnesses of the prosecution are interested witnesses but even then there are many omission and contradictions in their statements and they have not fully supported the prosecution case. The prosecution has also failed to prove any motive with the appellant for commission of this offence. He would n