CAV Judgment

1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated

21.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No.25/2016 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.), whereby the Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294, 323, 506B, 354A, 354B, 384, 385 & 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) and Section 67 of IT Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 month and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, R.I. for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, R.I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- respectively, with default stipulations. All jail sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. According to case of the prosecution, on 04.05.2015 while the complainant- Ku. Niti Dhrue and one Bhopal Sahu were going to their sister's house for attending marriage ceremony allegedly while going to Navagaon, the appellant and other co-accused persons stopped them near Sonepari at about 2:30 PM, by abusing Bhopal Sahu, they snatched his mobile and Rs.20 and outraged the modesty of the complainant- Ku. Niti Dhrue which was recorded in mobile phone and also looted Rs. 1,000/- from her and finally after giving threats, the appellant along with other co-accused persons fled away from the spot. Thereafter, both the complainant went to Navagaon and attended the marriage ceremony and did not inform the incident to anyone. However, when the complainant- Ku. Niti Dhrue came to know that video recording of the incident has been circulated in whatsapp, then the complainant went to the police station and lodged FIR Ex.P-2 on 07.06.2015 against the appellant and other co-accused persons on the basis of which, offence has been registered against the appellant and other co-accused persons. Later on statements of the complainant and other witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the Police under Sections 341, 294, 323, 506(II), 354A, 354 B, 384, 385 read with 34 of IPC and Section 66 of IT Act. Trial Court framed the charges against the appellant and other co-accused persons 341, 294, 323, 506B, 354A, 354B, 384, 385, 395 read with 34 of IPC and Section 67 of IT Act. To robe the appellant in the crime-in- question, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statement of the Appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, he has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter, however, no defence witness was examined by the Appellant.

3. After completion of trial, Trial Court convicted and sentenced the Appellant as mentioned in Para 01 of this judgment.

Hence, this appeal.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that though he has raised various grounds in the memo of appeal challenging the conviction as well as the sentence part, however, he is now confining his argument only to the sentence part. He further submits that the Appellant is in jail since 08.06.2015 and he has no criminal antecedents. He also submits that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already allowed the appeals in part of the co-accused persons in this case namely Somendra @ Somy Dhruv, Devkumar, Yashwant Diwan, Vasudev Diwan and Bhojram Nishad vide judgment dated 17.08.2021 in CRA No.1592 of 2016, CRA No.492 of 2017, CRA No.999 of 2017 and CRA No.199 of 2018 respectively where conviction of the co-accused persons have been affirmed and they are sentenced to the period already undergone by them while maintaining the fine amount. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the present appellant may also be reduced to the period already undergone by h