Lokendra Das Mahant @ Loken vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1626 Chatt

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                     Order Sheet
                                  CRA No. 1829 of 2019
  • Lokendra Das Mahant @ Loken, Son of Jeevan Das Mahant, aged about 18
    Years 6 Month, Resident Of Village Khutakunda, Tahsil And Police Station
    Kartala, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.
                                                            ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
  • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kartala,
    District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.                            ---- Respondent

06-08-2021 Mr. Vikash Pandey, counsel for the appellant/s.

Mr. Lalit Jangde, Dy. GA for the State/respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2019 application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 15.11.2019 passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) / Special Court - The Protection of

Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Korba, District Korba, CG in

Special Case No. (POSCO) No. 23/2018.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the statement of

prosecutrix clearly shows that she had an affair with the appellant and

whatever was done was a consensual act.

It is further submitted that the evidence with regard to age of the

prosecutrix renders mode probable that the prosecutrix was more than 18

years of age on the date of commission of alleged offence because no birth

certificate has been produced and statement of the mother of the

prosecutrix (PW-4) renders probable that on the date of alleged

commission of offence the prosecutrix was even more than 19 years of age.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes and submits that

that the entries made in the school records and the oral evidence of the

father proves that the prosecutrix was around 17 years of age at the time of

alleged commission of offence.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties,

particularly taking into consideration the evidence of the prosecutrix and

the material evidence with regard to age of the prosecutrix, we are inclined

to suspend the jail sentence and grant bail.

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the

substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain

suspended during the pendency of the appeal and he shall be released on

bail furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two local sureties of the

like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for his

appearance before the concerned trial Court on 27th September, 2021

and all such further dates as may be directed by the said Court, interval

being not less than 6 months, till final disposal of this appeal.

Post the appeal for final hearing.

Certified copy as per rules.

                               Sd/-                                          Sd/-
                  (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava)                     (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
                              Judge                                         Judge



Pawan Prajapati