Digitally

2025:CGHC:58051 signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK NAFR Date:

2025.12.09 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

10:30:42 +0530 CRA No. 888 of 2005 Yuvraj Sahu, S/o. Tijau Sahu, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Village Khapri, Police Station Kurud, Distt. Dhamtari (CG)

... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Arjuni, Distt. Dhamtari (CG)

... Respondent For appellant : Mr. Anjay Mishra, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Vivek Rathor, Adv.

For Respondent : Ms. Prabha Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

(Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J)

Judgment on Board

28/11/2025

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant under Section

374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘Cr.P.C.’) challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11- 11-2005 passed by learned Special Judge, Raipur (CG) in Special Sessions case No. 96/2004 whereby the appellant / accused has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

Sentences imposed for default of fine have been directed to be served separately.

2. Facts of the case, in nutshell, are that, appellant/accused had repaired the shutter of shop of Shivcharan Netam (son of complainant Mohanlal). On the date of incident 18-6-2004 at about 10.00 am, appellant approached him at his shop and demanded payment of aforesaid repairing work, which was declined by the Shivcharan Netam by saying that, he had not repaired the shutter properly, therefore, he said him to repair the shutter properly and take money. On this, the appellant angered and abused him in filthy language naming his caste, also assaulted him (Shivcharan Netam) and his father / complainant Mohanlal, thereby appellant insulted the complainant and his son, who belong to scheduled tribe community. An FIR (Ex. P-1) was lodged by complainant Mohanlal Netam (P.W. 3). Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.. Medical examination of complainant and his son Shivcharan Netam (P.W. 2) was conducted by Dr. C.B.S. Banjare (P.W. 9) in which, vide his report Ex. P-10, he opined that no external injury was found on the body of Shivcharan, rather he was complaining pain on palm of right hand. Vide MLC report (Ex. P-11) of Mohanlal, the doctor opined that, he had sustained injury on left forearm, swelling and ecchymosis developed and his left side of lip torn. Caste certificate of complainant Mohanlal (P.W. 3) and his son Shivcharan (P.W. 2) were seized vide seizure memo Ex. P-2. Spot map was prepared. After due investigation, a charge-sheet under Sections 294, 323 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth, referred to as ‘the Atrocities Act’) was filed by the police against the appellant before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhamtari, who committed the case to the Sessions Court, Raipur, who transferred the same to the Special Court, Raipur for trial.

3. Learned Special Judge framed charges under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act and Section 323 of the IPC against the appellant and explained to him, who abjured his guilt and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove the guilt of accused, the prosecution examined following witnesses and exhibited following documents:-

WITNESSES EXHIBITS Statement of the appellant/accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

was recorded, in which, he denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in evidence of prosecution witnesses, pleaded innocence and not guilty. The appellant has not examined any witness in his defence.

5. Learned Special Court after appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution, convicted appellant under Section 323 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act and sentenced him as has been mentioned in opening paragraph of this judgment. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused would submit that, Tekuram (P.W. 6) and Rakesh Agrawal (P.W. 7) are said to be eye-witness