Order on Board

03/04/2024

1. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated

21.10.2013 passed by the learned First Additional Session Judge to the Fourth Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 160/2013, by which the learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal and maintained the judgment and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 339/2009 order dated 03.05.2013 whereby the learned JMFC convicted the applicants under Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 01 year to each of the accused and fine of amount of Rs. 500-500/- in default of payment fine

01-01 month additional rigorous imprisonment.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that the report was alleged to have been lodged at police station Koni by complainant Sharad Kumar and on the basis of which F.I.R. was taken down and the story of the prosecution is at about 121:00 in a noon near the panthela of Deepak Kewat complainant Sharad Kumar, Suraj Noni, Amisha were playing and near the place of occurrence at provision store of Ramadhar applicant Naresh was alleged to have been sitting and near the shop Awadhesh, Ganesh, Rajendra, Gopal, Golu and deceased Tej Kumar were standing and at that time the applicants have alleged asked Tej Kumar, that he has stolen Rs. 400/- from the khata and to which Tej Kumar stated that he has not stolen any money and at that point of time the applicant as alleged assaulted him by fist and blow over the body of the deceased and thereafter, Tejkumar came back to his home and thereafter, strangulated himself in his home by a knot of saree in the neck and died and case was registered against the applicants and dead body was Tej Kumar for postmortem examination and after the seizure from Money Ram one old saree was seized in the presence of the witnesses by seizure memo exhibit P/12 and from the body of the deceased one purse in which some letters were seized by seizure memo exhibit P/4 and after the completion of the investigation of the case, the police filed the charge sheet against the applicants before the learned competent court, Bilaspur.

3. After the case was filed by the Station House OfÏcer of police station Koni in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, the charge was alleged to have been framed against the applicants for the offence u/s 330 of Indian Penal Code and to which the applicants had denied the guilty and the prosecution was directed to examine the witnesses and in this case Sharad Kumar P.W. 1, Raju P.W.2, Sukdev P.W.5, Puran Lal P.W. 7, Yogesh Kumar P.W. 6, and Suraj P.W. 3 were examined Dr.

Ashok Dixit P.W.11 who had performed the postmortem and the investigation ofÏcer Samrat Lal P.W.10 was examined apart from the other seizure witnesses examined by the prosecution as P.W. 8 Jhadiram and P.W. 9 Manbodh Kasar and in so far as the defense witnesses Rajendra Sahu D.W. 1 and Awadhesh Verma D.W. 2 was examined, but the learned trial magistrate on the basis of the wrong appearance of the evidence with respect to the charge u/S 330 of the Indian Penal Code wrongly, illegally, improperly convicted and sentence the applicants.

4. The applicants before filing this criminal revision have been filed the criminal appeal which was heard by learned First Additional Session Judge to Fourth Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur and the learned Appellate Court also in the same manner allegedly did not properly appreciate the evidence adduced by the prosecution and also did not correctly appreciate the evidence of the defense witnesses and dismissed the appeal and maintain the sentence passed by the learned trial magistrate.

5. Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have already under gone the jail sentence as awarded by the trial Court and afÏrmed by the learned Appellate Court.

6. Since the applicants have already served out the jail sen