Shivlal Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1752 Chatt

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 282 of 2020

• Shivlal Yadav, S/o Chudhal Yadav, Aged about 25 years, R/o Village - Devsara
  Khurd, Police Station- Shankargarh, District - Balrampur (C.G.). ---- Appellant

                                    Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station-
  Dhaurpur, District - Surguja (C.G.).                      ---- Respondent

12.08.2021 Mr. H.S. Patel, counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. Amit Singh, P.L. for the State/Respondent. Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No. 02/2020, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 30.11.2019 passed in Special Criminal Case (POCSO) No. 06/2016 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Surguja (Ambikapur) (C.G.) Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), the appellant stands convicted as mentioned below:

                  Conviction               Sentence              In Default

             U/s 363 of the IPC     RI for 04 years and In default of payment of
                                    fine    amount     of fine amount additional SI
                                    Rs.500/-.             for 01 month.

             U/s 366 of the IPC     RI for 05 years and In default of payment of
                                    fine    amount     of fine amount additional SI
                                    Rs.500/-.             for 01 month.

U/s 506-B of the RI for 04 years and In default of payment of IPC fine amount of fine amount additional SI Rs.500/-. for 01 month.

U/s 5(ठ)/6 of the RI for 10 years and In default of payment of fine amount of fine amount additional SI Special Act Rs.500/-. for 01 month.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been wrongly convicted by the trial Court in the judgment without there being any sufficient evidence available on record. He also submits that the appellant is in jail since 28.12.2015 and appeal is likely to take some more time. Hence, it is prayed that his 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.

I have perused the judgment of the trial Court as well as statements of the prosecutrix (PW-06) and her brother namely Nanaku Yadav (PW-08) and other evidence adduced by the prosecution before the trial Court particularly medical evidence of the proseucutrix. After perusal of the statements of the prosecutrix (PW-

06) and her brother namely Nanaku Yadav (PW-08) and other evidence, I am of this opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant during the pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, I.A. No.02/2020 is rejected. List this case for final hearing in its due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Vasant