SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 20547

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PYARE LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHTTISGARH – Respondent
CRA/996/2004



NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 996 of 2004

1 - Pyare Lal S/o Ram Avatar, Aged About 22 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.)

2 - Ramdhari S/o Rambriksha, Aged About 50 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Village-

Chendara, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.)

3 - Kapil Dev S/o Ram Avtar, Aged About 20 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.)

4 - Mangal Sai S/o Ramdhari, Aged About 25 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Village-

Chendara, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.)

5 - Ram Avatar S/o Dheen Das (Died And Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated-12-11-

2024.

6 - Sunder Sai S/o Ramadhari, Aged About 35 Years Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Karoti, P.S.- Bhaiyathan, District- Surguja (C.G.)

7 - (Abated) Dhola Ram (Died) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 24-03-2025.

... Appellants versus

1 - State Of Chhttisgarh, Though P.S.-Jhilmili, District-Sarguja (C.G.)

... Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishnakant Prajapati on behalf of Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate For State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. GA Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board

24/03/2025 This appeal under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short Act of CrPC) has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.11.2004 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur, CG in Sessions Trial No. 359/03. By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as mentioned below:

Conviction Sentence
Under Section 147 IPC RI for 6 month
Under Section 323/149 IPC RI for 6 month
Under Section 324/149 IPC RI for 1 year
Under Section 323/149 IPC RI for 6 month
Under Section 325/149 IPC RI for 2 year and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine 6 months additional RI.
Under Section 148 IPC RI for 1 year
(All sentences to run concurrently)

2. Prosecution case : On 20.06.2003 at about 6 AM the complainant Sant Lal, along with Rudra Prasad, Nand Lal and Laxmania had gone to the field for sowing paddy. When Laxmania was sitting on the bund, the accused/appellants came there. Accused Pyare Lal tried to restrain them from tilling the field. Accused Pyarelal and Ram Avtar were carrying axe, accused Kapil Deo and Magal Sai were carrying club, accused Ram Dhari and Sunder Sai were carrying crowbar. They restrained Sant Lal, Nand Lal and Rudra Prasad from cultivating the land claiming that to be theirs. In prosecution of common object they started assaulting with crowbar, club and axe carried by them, as a result of which Nand Lal suffered injury on head, left arm, both legs; Sant Lal suffered injury on right arm, left foot, waist and left arm; Rudra Prasad suffered injury on right arm and head whereas Laxmania was also subjected to thrashing with hands and fists. Thereupon, Rudra Prasad rushed to the village and informed him and other villagers about the incident. Injured Nand Lal was brought home. Thereafter, complainant went to the police station and lodged a report against the accused/appellants for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC. After ensuring medical examination of the injured persons and completion of investigation charge- sheet was filed against the appellants under Sections 147, 148, 323/149 twice, 324/149 and 307/149 IPC followed by framing of charge accordingly. The appellants denied the charges and claimed trial.

3. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants under Section 313 CrPC were also recorded where they pleaded their innocence and false implication.

4. After hearing the parties, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.

5. Is it relevant to mention here that during the pendency of this appeal accused Ram Avatar and Dhola Ram passed away and t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top