Sohan vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1751 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  Order Sheet

                              CRA No. 561 of 2020

1. Sohan, S/o Shri Ram Nath Patel, Aged About 26 years,

2. Sunil, S/o Shri Chhat Ram Patel, Aged About 23 years,

   Both appellants are R/o Village Changori, Police Station Akaltara, Civil & Revenue
   District Janjgir Champa (C.G.).

                                                                       ---- Appellants

                                     Versus

 • State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station-
   Akaltara, Civil & Revenue District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.).

                                                                    ---- Respondent

12/08/2021 Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, counsel for the appellants.

Mr. Shrawan Kumar Chandel, counsel for the victim.

Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A. for the State/respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard I.A. No. 01/2020, application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.

By the impugned judgment dated 18.03.2020 passed in

Special Sessions Case No. 13/2019 by the learned Special

Judge (Atrocities), District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.) both the

appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:

      Conviction             Sentence              In Default

U/s 354 of IPC        RI for 02 years with In      default   of
                      a fine amount of Rs. payment of fine
                      1,000/-              amount additional
                                           RI for 03 months.

U/s 08 of         the RI for 03 years with In      default   of
POCSO Act             a fine amount of payment of fine
                      Rs.1,000/-           amount additional
                                           RI for 03 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 the appellants were on bail

during trial and after the judgment of the trial Court they were

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

may 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 executing a

personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- each 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

13.12.2021. 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 its due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Vasant