Roshan Kumar Jangde vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 91 Chatt

                                                                                    NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                         Proceeding Through Video Conferencing

                                    CRA No. 468 of 2021

    Roshan Kumar Jangde, S/o Parshottam Jangde, aged about 23 Years, R/o Village
     Boriya (Ghivri), Police Station and District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                              ----Appellant

                                           Versus

    State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Station House Officer, Police Station
     Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                          ---- Respondent

12/04/2021 Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, counsel for the appellant.

Shri Vimlesh Bajpai, Government Advocate for the State.

Heard on admission.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Call for the record of the trial Court.

Also heard on I.A. No.01 of 2021, application for suspension

of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 24.03.2021 passed by the

Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act, 2012), Bemetara, C.G., in

Special Sessions Case No.60/2019, the appellant stands

convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 354 of the Indian Rigorous Imprisonment for Penal Code three years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo further additional rigorous imprisonment for 6 months

Under Section 8 of Protection of Rigorous Imprisonment for Children from Sexual Offences three years and fine of Act, 2012 Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo further additional rigorous imprisonment for 6 months

(Both sentences were directed to run concurrently)

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial

Court has not properly appreciated the overall evidence available

on record for holding the appellant guilty. He further submits that

there are major contradictions and omissions in the statements of

the prosecution witnesses. The appellant was on bail during trial

as also after passing of the impugned judgment for a limited

period and did not misuse the liberty granted to him and disposal

of the appeal is likely to take some time. Therefore, the appellant

be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the

bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in

particular the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is of three years, the fact that he was on bail during trial

as well as after passing of the impugned judgment for a limited

period and did not misuse the liberty granted to him and that

disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, without

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the

opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence

imposed upon the appellant and to release him on bail.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.01 of 2021) is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence

imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the

pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his

furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two

sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

He shall appear before the trial Court on 13.06.2021 and

thereafter continue to appear there on all such dates as are given

to him by the said Court till disposal of this appeal.

Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

Akhilesh