Chattisgarh High Court
Noushad Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 August, 2025
1
Digitally
signed by
AKHILESH
AKHILESH BEOHAR
BEOHAR Date:
2025.08.26
17:53:50
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 907 of 2016
• Noushad Khan, S/o Lliyas Khan, aged about 21 Years, By Profession -
Driver R/o - Bus - Stand - Nagri, Police Station - Nagri, Tahsil and Revenue
Civil District and District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
...Applicant
versus
• State of Chhattisgarh, Police Station Dugali, Through District Magistrate -
Dhamtari, Civil - Revenue District, Tahsil and District Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Jameel Akhtar Lohani, Advocate.
For Non-applicant : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal
Order on Board
26.08.2025
1.
The present applicant has preferred this criminal revision under Section
397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated
01.09.2016 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, C.G. in Criminal
Appeal No.94/2015, whereby the learned Appellate Court dismissed the
appeal, while affirming the judgment dated 04.08.2015 passed in Criminal
Case No.150/2014 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagri, District
Dhamtari, C.G., convicting the applicant under Section 279 of Indian Penal
Code (for short, ‘IPC‘) and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine
amount to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days, under Section 337
(two counts) of IPC and fine of Rs.500/- on two counts, in default of
2
payment of fine amount to undergo simple imprisonment for 7-7 days,
under Section 338 (four counts) and sentencing him to rigorous
imprisonment for 1-1 month and fine of Rs.500/- on each count, in default
thereof, to undergo S.I. for 15 days each and under Section 304-A of IPC,
he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and
fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo simple
imprisonment for 15 days with a direction to run all the sentences
concurrently.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.05.2014 at about 4:00 am,
complainant/PW-1- Mohan Suresha was returning from Durg after
attending the marriage of his nephew- Deepak, while travelling in an
Innova bearing registration No.CG05-R-0786. When the said vehicle
reached near village Parsapani, at the main turning point of Nagri, due to
high speed, it dashed against a Chabutra at the chowk, owing to which,
the occupants of the vehicle sustained injuries. In the said accident, one
Goutam sustained simple injuries, whereas PW-3 Deepak, PW-5 Mamta,
PW-6 Karuna and PW-4 Neha suffered grievous injuries and Kundai Bai
Umre succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, complainant- Mohan Suresha
lodged an FIR at Police Station Dugali, on the basis of which Crime
No.16/2014 was registered against the applicant for the aforesaid
Sections.
3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Nagri, C.G.. The accused/applicant abjured the
charges and pleaded non-guilty.
4. The Court of JMFC, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence,
convicted and sentenced the present applicant as mentioned in Para 1 of
this order. The said judgment was challenged by the applicant in criminal
3
appeal, however, the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 01.09.2016
dismissed the appeal while upholding the judgment of the Trial Court.
Hence, this revision.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press
this revision on conviction part of the applicant, but confines his argument
to the sentence part only, which according to him, is on higher side. He
further submits that as per the evidence of PW-3 Deepak Kumar Suresh
and PW-5 Mamta Suresh, it is clear that at the time of accident, suddenly
some animals appeared on the way and while trying to save them, the
offending vehicle dashed with a platform at the chowk and the offending
vehicle did not lose its balance until the accident occurred. He also
submits that the applicant has remained in jail from 01.09.2016 to
30.09.2016 i.e. one month, he is facing the lis since May, 2014, i.e. more
than 11 years. He also submits that at the time of accident, applicant was a
young boy and he has no criminal antecedents. He also submits that the
fine amount has already been deposited by the applicant with the
concerned trial Court. Therefore, it is prayed that the jail sentence awarded
to the applicant be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposes the revision and supports
the impugned judgment.
7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and
perused the record.
8. Considering the statements of complainant/PW-1 Mohan Suresha, PW-3
Deepak Kumar Suresha, PW-4 Neha Umre, PW-5 Mamta Suresha and
PW-6 Karuna Shrivas and the other evidence and material available on
record, this Court is of the opinion that the finding recorded by the learned
trial Court as well as the Appellate Court being based on the evidence
4
available on record is a correct finding and I hereby affirm the said finding
of conviction of applicant.
9. As regards the sentence part, considering the facts and circumstances of
the case, further considering the fact that from the evidence of PW-3
Deepak Kumar Suresh and PW-5 Mamta Suresh, it is clear that at the time
of accident, suddenly animals appeared on the way and while trying to
save them, the offending vehicle dashed with a platform at the chowk and
the offending vehicle did not lose its balance until the accident occurred,
also considering the fact that the applicant remained in jail from
01.09.2016 to 30.09.2016 i.e. one month, he is facing the lis since May,
2014, i.e. more than 11 years and he has no criminal antecedents, I am of
the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the
conviction imposed upon the applicant, the jail sentence awarded to him is
reduced to one month rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section
304-A of IPC and 7-7 days simple imprisonment on each count for the
offence under Section 338 (four count) which he has already undergone,
however, the fine sentence with default stipulations for the aforesaid
offences shall remain intact. The conviction and sentence of the applicant
under Sections 279 & 337 (two counts) shall also remain intact. All the
sentences are directed to run concurrently. Ordered Accordingly.
10. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed.
11. It is reported that the applicant is on bail. His bail bonds are not discharged
at this stage and the same shall remain operative for a further period of six
months in light of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
(Radhakishan Agrawal)
Judge
Akhilesh