Sanju Kumar @ Bhuru Ghivraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Sanju Kumar @ Bhuru Ghivraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 March, 2026

          Digitally
          signed by
          SOURABH
SOURABH   PATEL
PATEL     Date:
          2026.03.09
          17:17:36
          +0530




                                                           1/3




                            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                                              CRA No. 611 of 2026

                       1 - Sanju Kumar @ Bhuru Ghivraj S/o Neelkanth Ghivraj, Aged
                       About 19 Years, R/o Baheradih, P.S. Jaijaipur, District Sakti C.G.
                                                                                  ... Appellant
                                                          versus

                       1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
                       Station Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa Now District Sakti C.G.
                                                                                 ... Respondent

Order Sheet 09/03/2026 Mr. Atul kumar Gavel, Advocate for the Appellant.

Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. for the State. Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2026, which is an application under Section 430 of BNSS for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned order dated 23.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC), Sakti, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Special S.T. No. 33/2024, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned below :

2/3

Conviction Sentence Offence under Section R.I. for 02 years and fine of 331(3) of BNS. Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, R.I. for 01 month.

Offence under Section R.I. for 03 years and fine of 74 of BNS. Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, R.I. for 02 months.

(both the sentences were directed to run concurrently) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant i.e., R.I. for 03 years out of which he has already served the jail sentence of about 116 days. He further submits that the appellant is currently on bail and he has deposited the fine amount imposed upon him. Therefore, it is prayed that I.A. No. 01/2026 may be allowed and the jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended till the final disposal of the case.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the appellant has 3/3 already on bail and he has deposited the fine amount imposed upon him, the final disposal of this appeal is likely to take considerable time, therefore, I find it appropriate to allow the application (I.A. No. 01/2026) and suspend his jail sentence during pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, the I.A. No. 01/2026 is allowed The execution of substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 16.06.2026. He shall thereafter appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.

Call for record of the trial Court.

Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.