Ishahak @ Ishak @ Lomadi vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5599 Chatt
Judgement Date : 7 September, 2022

Chattisgarh High Court
Ishahak @ Ishak @ Lomadi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 September, 2022
                                               1
                                                                         CRA No. 1148 of 2018



                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                       Order Sheet

                                   CRA No. 1148 of 2018

Ishahak @ Ishak @ Lomadi S/o Filip Kujur, aged about 30 years, R/o Village Basantala,
Beltoli, P.S. Narayanapur, District Jashpur, C.G.

                                           Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Police Station : Narayanapur, District
Jashpur, C.G.

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput




 07.09.2022          Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, counsel for the appellant.

                     Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. G.A. for the State / respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.2/2018, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 18.04.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kunkuri District Jashpur, C.G. in Sessions Trial No.55/2016, the appellant has been convicted as under :-

                         Conviction                         Sentence

                Under Section 302 of IPC       Imprisonment of life and fine of

Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 1 year;

2

CRA No. 1148 of 2018 Under Section 450 of IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default payment of fine further R.I. for 6 months;

Under Section 326 of IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 6 months.

Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, 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 18.08.2016, therefore, application may be allowed and appellant may be released on bail.

Per contra, Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned State counsel, opposes the prayer raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on the basis of statement eye witnesses Subedar Bhagat (PW-1), Ku. Sarita Bai (PW-5) & Shravan Ram (PW-7) the concerned 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 of eye witnesses Subedar Bhagat (PW-1), Ku. Sarita Bai (PW-5) & Shravan Ram (PW-7) and further considering the other evidence available on 3 CRA No. 1148 of 2018 record, we are not inclined to grant bail to the present appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.2/2018 is rejected.

However, hearing of the appeal be expedited as the appellant is in jail since 18.08.2016.

                       Sd/-                                 Sd/-
                 (Sanjay K. Agrawal)               (Sachin Singh Rajput)
                       Judge                               Judge




Ankit