HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 299 of 2021
Rajesh Sahu Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
Division Bench:-
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
16.11.2022 Mr. A.K. Yadav, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Ashish Tiwari, G.A. for the State / respondent.
Heard on I.A. No.1/2021, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.02.2021 passed by the Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Fast Track Court, Mungeli, District Mungeli, C.G. in Special Sessions Trial No.12/2018, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of amount Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine 3 months further R.I. and also under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of amount of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine 3 months further R.I.
Mr. A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in question and he has been convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to the record. He is in custody since 17.01.2018, therefore, application may be allowed and appellant may be released on bail.
Per contra, Mr. Ashish Tiwari, learned State counsel, opposes the prayer raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on the basis of statement Sanat Kumar (PW-1), Raju Bargah (PW-7), Deviprasad Kaushik (PW-16), FSL report (unexhibited) dated 31.05.2018 and on the basis of age of the prosecutrix / deceased who was aged about 14 years at the time of incident the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the present appellant and, as such, the bail application of the appellant deserves to be rejected.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and also perused the records with utmost circumspection.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence and considering statement Sanat Kumar (PW-1), Raju Bargah (PW-7), Deviprasad Kaushik (PW-16), FSL report (unexhibited) dated 31.05.2018 in which on articles D, E & F i.e. underwear, slide and swab of the prosecutrix / deceased respectively, stains of semen and human sperm were found and the age of the prosecutrix / deceased who was aged about 14 years at the time of incident and further considering the other evidence available on record, we are not inclined to grant bail to the present appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1/2021 is rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) ( Rakesh Mohan Pandey )
Judge Judge
Ankit