AKASH CHOUHAN vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010150192026 2026:CGHC:45386
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
AKHILESH
BEOHAR
Date:
2026.10.28
16:51:50
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AKHILESH
BEOHAR
CRA No. 1023 of 2026
Akash Chouhan, S/o Late Bhagwat @ Motu Chouhan, aged about 19
•
Years, R/o Village - Katiyapara, P.S. - City Kotwali, Presently Residing -
In Front of Hotel - 786, P.S. - Civil Line, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Appellant
versus
• The State of Chhattisgarh, Through, Police P.S. - Civil Line District -
Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate.
For State : Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Panel Lawyer.
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judgment on Board
27/10/2026
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section
415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short,
‘BNSS’), against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
th
dated 26.02.2026 passed by the learned 9 Upper Sessions Judge,
Bilaspur, C.G. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’) in Sessions
Case No.210/2021, whereby the appellant has been convicted and
sentenced as under:-
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 307 of Indian Rigorous Imprisonment for

2
Penal Code (in short, ‘IPC’) seven years and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount to
undergo additional rigorous
imprisonment for one year
Under Section 25(1B)(b) of
Arms Act
Rigorous Imprisonment for
three years and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount to
undergo additional rigorous
imprisonment for six months
Under Section 27(1) of the
Arms Act, 1959
Rigorous Imprisonment for
five years and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount to
undergo additional rigorous
imprisonment for six months
All sentences were directed to run concurrently
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.03.2021, at about 8:30
p.m., PW-6/injured Sheikh Shabbir had gone to Bharat Dairy, Taiba
Chowk, Bilaspur, to purchase milk, where appellant- Akash Chauhan,
along with his associates, allegedly abused him over a monetary
dispute and stabbed him in the abdomen with a knife with the intention
of causing his death. Thereafter, the injured- Sheikh Shabbir was taken
to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur. On report being lodged in this regard, an
FIR (Ex.P-2) was registered against the appellant for the offences
punishable under Sections 294, 307 and 34 of IPC.
3. During investigation, Investigating Officer prepared the spot map
(Ex.P-3), obtained the medical report of the injured (Ex.P-13), and
recorded the memorandum statement of the appellant (Ex.P-6),
pursuant to which, a knife was recovered from the appellant and seized
vide Ex.P-7. Appellant was arrested vide Ex.P-9. Blood-stained grey-
coloured lower worn by the injured was seized vide Ex.P-8. Seized
articles were sent to FSL for chemical examination, and the FSL report

3
was obtained vide Ex.P-22. After completion of investigation, charge-
sheet was filed against the appellant for the offence punishable under
Sections 307, 294 & 34 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act.
4. The learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant under
Sections 294, 307 and 506 Part II of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the
Arms Act. Appellant denied the charges, pleaded not guilty and claimed
to be tried.
5. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial
Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in
paragraph 1 of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.
6. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does
not wish to press the present appeal insofar as the conviction recorded
by the learned trial Court is concerned and confines his submissions to
the quantum of sentence. He further submits that, although the
appellant assaulted the victim with a knife in the stomach, but the
dispute arose over a trivial issue, i.e., a demand of Rs.20/- by the
appellant from the victim. He also submits that the appellant has been
in jail since 29.03.2021, i.e., the date of his arrest, and has undergone
more than 5 years and 6 months of imprisonment. Appellant has no
criminal antecedents and is a young boy aged about 19 years.
Therefore, it is prayed that his jail sentence may be reduced to the
period already undergone by him.
7. On the contrary, learned State counsel supports the impugned
judgment and submits that the appellant caused an injury to a vital part
of the victim’s body with a sharp-edged weapon. Therefore, the

4
conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant are justified, and the
appeal deserves to be dismissed.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record, including the record of the trial Court.
9. Though learned counsel for the appellant is not pressing the appeal
against the conviction recorded by the learned trial Court, but the
depositions of PW-6/injured Sheikh Sabbir, PW-1 Dr. Komal Prasad
and PW-7 Dr. Rani Keshari establish that the appellant assaulted the
victim with a knife, causing an injury to his stomach. Furthermore, the
knife was also seized from the possession of the appellant. Thus, the
finding recorded by the learned trial Court holding the appellant guilty
of the offences under Section 307 of IPC and Sections 25(1B)(b) and
27(1) of the Arms Act is based on the evidence available on record.
Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the finding of
conviction, which is hereby affirmed.
10. So far as the sentence is concerned, having considered the isolated
injury sustained by the victim due to the assault by the appellant, the
other facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the
appellant has undergone more than 5 years and 6 months of
imprisonment (i.e., from 29.03.2021 till date) against the sentence
awarded by the learned trial Court, this Court is of the view that no
useful purpose would be served by keeping the appellant in further
detention to undergo the remaining period of sentence, rather, the ends
of justice would be served if his jail sentence under the aforesaid
sections is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Ordered
accordingly.

5
11. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the
appellant under Section 307 of IPC and Sections 25(1B)(b) and 27(1) of
the Arms Act, as recorded by the learned trial Court, is affirmed.
However, the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant under the
aforesaid sections is reduced to the period already undergone by him,
i.e., from 29.03.2021 till date. The fine amount, along with the default
sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, shall remain intact. The
impugned judgment stands modified to the above extent.
12. Appellant is reported to be in jail. Therefore, he be released forthwith, if
not required in any other case.
13. Keeping in view the provisions of Section 481 of the BNSS, the
appellant is directed to furnish a personal bond in terms of Form No. 45
prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, for a sum of
Rs.25,000/- before the concerned Special Court, which shall remain
effective for a period of six months, along with an undertaking that, in
the event of filing of a Special Leave Petition against the instant
judgment or for grant of leave, the appellant, on receipt of notice
thereof, shall appear before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
14. Record of the concerned trial Court along with a copy of this judgment
be sent back forthwith for information and necessary compliance.
15. Interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Akhilesh