Ayub Khan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRR No. 595 of 2010 Ayub Khan son of Haji Sekh Rahman Khan, aged about 43 years, resident of Rengakhar Khurd, Tehsil & District Kabirdham (Kawardha), CG --- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through District Magistrate, Kawardha, District Kabirdham, CG --- Respondent For Applicant - Shri Basant Dewangan, Adv.

For Respondent - Smt. M. Asha, PL Order on Board by Hon'ble Smt. Vimla Singh Kapoor, J. 28.11.2018:

By this revision petition the applicant has assailed the judgment dated 02.11.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Kabirdham (Kawardha) in Criminal Appeal No. 40/2009 affirming the judgment dated 13.10.2009 passed by Judicial Magistrate Second Class, Kabirdham in Criminal Case No. 78/2009 convicting the accused/applicant under Sections 147 and 341/149 IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for six months with fine of Rs. 500/- u/s 147 and SI for one month with fine of Rs. 500/- u/s 341/149 IPC, plus default stipulations.

2.

Facts of the case in short are that on 13.01.2003 the accused/applicant herein along-with many others restrained the officials of the Forest Department when they had gone to the Bhoramdev Forest area to stop them from cutting the trees and trying to collect the wood already cut, and thus caused obstacles in the discharge of their public duties. Even when the Forest officials

were getting back, the accused/applicant and other villagers, did not let them do so by hindering their movement after blocking the road and thus wrongfully restrained them from discharging their public duties. On registration of case and completion of investigation, the challan was laid by the police under sections 147 and 341/149 IPC.

3.

After examining the material available on record and the evidence of the witnesses the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused/applicant herein as above. The findings recorded by the trial Court have subsequently been affirmed by the lower Appellate Court by the judgment impugned and it is that which is under challenge in this revision.

4.

There is a certificate dated 20.04.2018 issued by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur which shows that the accused/applicant herein died on 18.03.2018 i.e. during the pendency of this revision. However, this Court has to decide the case on its own merits, in view of the order passed by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the matter of Pranab Kumar Mitra v. State of WB reported in AIR 1959 SC 144 which says that in absence of statutory provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure the revision will not finally abate on the death of convicted applicant and the High Court has to exercise the power to determine the case even after death of the convicted persons.

5.

Counsel for the accused/applicant submits that the Court below has not given thoughtful consideration to the evidence on record while holding the accused/applicant guilty under Sections 147 and 341/149 IPC and therefore the judgment impugned is liable to be set aside.

6.

State counsel however supports the judgment under assail and submits that the Courts below have recorded the well reasoned finding while writing the judgment impugned and therefore, no interference there-with is needed by this Court. 7.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the evidence on record.

8.

Having gone through the evidence of PW-4 to PW-10 and PW12 who have duly supported the case of the prosecution, it is clear that a group of villagers led by the accused/applicant had restrained the officials of the forest department from discharging their official duties. They had also restricted their retro-movement from the forest area and thus wrongfully restrained them from discharging their official duties. Court below has been fully justified in convicting and sentencing him as shown above and no illegality or infirmity is visible in the same.

9.

Revision therefore being without any substance is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed as such.

Sd/- (Vimla Singh Kapoor) Judge Jyotishi