Shubham Ratre vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1654 Chatt

                     HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                        Order Sheet

                                   CRA No. 773 of 2021

 1. Shubham Ratre S/o Kamal Kumar Ratre Aged About 21 Years R/o Old Bus
    Stand Seepat, P. S. Seepat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

 2. Jitendra Kumar S/o Shantanu Suryavanshi Aged About 22 Years R/o Old Bus
    Stand Seepat, P. S. Seepat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

                                                                           ---- Appellants

                                           Versus

    State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, P. S. Seepat, District
    Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

                                                                         ---- Respondent

09.08.2021 Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, Counsel for the Appellants.

Mr. Akash Pandey, P.L. for the State/Respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, an application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail to the Appellant.

By the impugned judgment date 16.07.2021 passed in Special Criminal

Case No.127/2018 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Second FTSC

(POCSO) Bilaspur (C.G.) the Appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:

                    Conviction                     Sentence              In Default

             U/s 354 read           with RI for 03 years with a In default of payment of
             Section 34 of IPC           fine amount of Rs.500/- fine amount additional RI
                                                                 for 06 months.

             U/s 506 of IPC              RI for 02 years with a In default of payment of

fine amount of Rs.500/- fine amount additional RI for 06 months.

U/s 7/8 of POCSO Act, RI for 03 years with a In default of payment of 2012 fine amount of Rs.500/- fine amount additional RI for 06 months.

Learned counsel for the Appellants submits that the Appellants have

been wrongly convicted by the Trial Court in the judgment without there being

any sufficient evidence available on record. He further submits that during trial

the Appellants were on bail and after the judgment of the Trial Court they were

granted temporary bail. Hence, it is prayed that their application be allowed.

On the other hand, Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail

application and submissions made in this respect.

Heard both the parties and perused the record of the Trial Court.

After perusing the impugned judgment and considering this fact that the

Appellants were on bail during the pendency of trial and have not misused the

liberty, for these reasons, I am of this opinion that it will be proper to release

the Appellants on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the appellants

shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they shall be

released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of

Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

Trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on

08.12.2021. They 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 them by the said Court, till the disposal

of this appeal.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Saurabh