1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1228 of 2021
Basant Kumar Miri S/o Sunil Kumar Miri Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Lachhanpur,
Out Post Karhibazar, P.S. City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh., ---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar
Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
07.03.2022 Shri Hemant Gupta, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Amit Verma, P.L. for the State/respondent.
Heard on I.A.No.01/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By way of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.09.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 03/2018, the appellant has been convicted under Sections 342, 451 and 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 342 of IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine amount of Rs.500/- under Section 451 of IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine amount of Rs.1000/- under Section 376 of IPC and in default of fine amount, the appellant has to undergo additional sentence of three months and six months respectively under Sections 451 & 376 of IPC.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, while inviting attention to the statement of the prosecutrix as well as F.S.L. report, marked as Ex.P.21, contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated in connection with the said crime. It is contended further that the appellant was in jail from 09.11.2017 2 till 09.05.2018 and thereafter he was released on bail during trial as per the order passed by this Court on 04.05.2018 in M.Cr.C.No.3295/2018 and thereafter, after delivery of judgment on 27.09.2021 he has been taken into custody to undergo remaining jail sentence and since the appeal is likely to take some time for its final disposal, therefore, the appellant may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State, while inviting attention to the injuries sustained by the prosecutrix, as per the report of Dr. Neha Gangesri (P.W.10), submitted that the appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Having considered the aforesaid contentions of the parties, considering further the statement of the prosecutrix as well as the F.S.L. report (Ex.P.21) and also considering further that since the appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him, I am inclined to allow this application.
The application (I.A.No. 01/2021) is accordingly allowed and it is ordered that the substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- along with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the said Court on 09.05.2022 and thereafter continue to appear on all such further dates as are given to him in that behalf till disposal of this appeal.
Post this matter for final hearing in its due course.
Sd/-
(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Anjani