2026:CGHC:20815 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No.520 of 2013 The date when The date when the The date when the judgment the judgment is judgment is is uploaded on the website reserved pronounced Operative Full

08.04.2026 05.05.2026 -- 05.05.2026

1 - Manoj Kumar S/o Narayan Prasad Aged About 27 Years 2 - Rajesh Kumar S/o Narayan Prasad Aged About 21 Years

3 - Shivprasad S/o Pukram Banjare Aged About 29 Years All Are R/o Ranigaon Rajabhatha, P.S. Baradwar, Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G. Civil and Revenue , Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh Appellants (s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through – Station House Officer., P.S.

Baradwar, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh Respondent(s)

CRA No.544 of 2013

1 - Narayan Prasad S/o Late Motilal Aged About 51 Years Caste Sonwani R/o Ranigaon (Rajabhatha), PS Baradwar, Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G. Civil and Rev. Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh Appellant (s)

Versus Digitally

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, PS Baradwar, Distt. Janjgir signed by R Champa, Chhattisgarh NIRALA Respondent(s)

For Appellants (s) : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate in CRA No.520/13 and Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate in CRA No.544/13 For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kanhaiya Ram Yadav and Mr. Amiya Bhushan, Panel Lawyers Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

C A V Judgment

1. Since both the appeals arise out of common judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as such the same have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by a common order.

2. The present appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.05.2013 passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Session Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) in ST No.256/2011, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 307/34 & 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years with fine of Rs.25,000/- and RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulations.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.11.2011, when the complainant Manoj and his family members were cutting their crops on their field, the accused reached there and stopped them by using filthy languages and assaulted them by axe, club, hand and fist, as a result of which the complainant received grievous injuries, thereafter a case was registered against the accused persons. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the concerned Magistrate and on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and material available on record, learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants, as mentioned in para 2 of the judgment.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and material available on record. There are material omissions and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The complainant did not receive grievous injuries and the learned Trial Court has also failed to appreciate the evidence of PW-10 Dr. Dr. Mamta Jagat and PW-12 Dr. P. Singh. The appellants also sustained injuries and a counter case was also registered against the complainant party but the learned Trial Court did not appreciate the material available on record properly and wrongly acquitted the complainant party and convicted the appellants for the aforesaid offence. Therefore, the finding recorded by the learned Trial Court is not sustainable and is liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellants lastly submits that the appellant Narayan Prasad is a government servant and has been wrongly roped in the present case due to previous animosity as such any confirmation of the conviction would adversely affect his service career. Therefore, the appeals deserve to be allowed. Reliance has been placed on the judgment rendered by this Court in the matter of Jagdish Prasad Sahu and another vs State of Chhattisgarh and another connected matter, passed in CRA No.207/2012 & ACQA No.43/2012, decided on 09.01.2026

5. Per contra, learned S