2026:CGHC:16243 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 968 of 2008 Kaila, S/o Shri Mahadev, aged about 50 years, Occupation – Agriculture, R/o Village Sukhratola, Sabhaduma, PS -Bindhamganj, Distt. Sonbhadra (UP)

... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through PS-Ramchandrapur, Distt. Surguja (CG)

... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Pandey, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Judgment On Board

09-04-2026 The appellant in this appeal calls in question the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.10.2008 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, Surguja in ST No.57/1987 whereby the appellant stands convicted under Section 395 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years, pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to suffer additional RI for six months.

02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16/01/1986 at about 7:15 PM, the complainant and his wife were sitting by the fire. The complainant’s daughter-in-law was serving food to the complainant’s son and a village boy named Govind Yadav. At that time, 3–4 unknown persons, armed with sticks and axes, arrived. Two of them caught hold of the two boys who were eating and tied them with a cloth (gamcha). The complainant’s daughter-in-law ran away from the spot. Then, one of the miscreants caught hold of the complainant’s wife and said, “Show us the belongings, or we will kill you.” Two or three of them also caught the complainant and warned him not to look up, or they would kill him. They made everyone sit inside the house. From the complainant’s house, they looted one brass pot (approx. 4 kg) worth Rs.200/-, four brass lotas (one approx. 1 kg and three about 750 g each) worth Rs.150/-, two brass plates (about 500 g each) worth Rs.100/-, one brass bowl (about 250 g) worth Rs.25/-, one aluminum cooking pot (approx. 1 kg) worth Rs.40/-, one black woolen blanket with white markings worth Rs.30/-, one white iron sheet trunk worth Rs.30/-, which contained one green terrycot kurta worth Rs.30/-, one white cotton dhoti worth Rs.20/-, one violet terrycot saree worth Rs.90/-, one red women’s sheet worth Rs.25/-, three cotton blouses (green, yellow, and one white nylon perforated), one red cotton saree with white print worth Rs.25/-, one small black tin box worth Rs.15/-, one steel necklace, one pair of plastic shoes, one iron axe and cash amount of Rs.7/-. Two of the thieves looted these items and locked the complainant and others inside the house. After somehow getting out, they raised an alarm, and villagers gathered there. The complainant, his wife, and daughter-in-law stated that they would be able to identify the culprits. Upon the report being lodged by the complainant Dargahi at Police Station Ramchandrapur, the police, after investigation, found sufficient evidence against the accused persons under Section 395 of IPC and presented them before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Samanujganj. After committal by the Magistrate, the case was received by the trial court.

03. Learned trial Court framed charge under Section 395 of IPC against the accused/appellant which was abjured by him and he prayed for trial. To bring home the charge, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses in all. 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 one Bandhu as DW-1.

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 above.

Hence this appeal.

05. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the material available on record. Learned trial Court ought to have apprecia