Chattisgarh High Court
Hemlal Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 August, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Proceedings through Video Conferencing
CRR No.508 of 2021
Hemlal Sahu, S/o Ram Kumar Sahu, Caste Teli, aged about 32 years, R/o
Gangoripaar, Chowki Kanwar, P.S. Gurur, District Balod (CG).
---Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through P.S. Gurur, District Balod (CG).
---Non-applicant
12.08.2021
Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Adv. for the State/non-applicant.
Heard on admission.
Issue notice to the non-applicant.
Shri Dinesh Tiwari, Dy.G.A. appears and accepts notice on
behalf of the State/non-applicant.
Also heard on I.A. No.1/2021 an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the applicant during the pendency of
the revision.
This revision has been preferred by the applicant against the
judgment dated 29.07.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No.74/2019
by learned Sessions Judge, Balod, District Balod (CG) whereby the
appellate Court has upheld the judgment of conviction passed by
the trial Court under Sections 287 and 338 of Indian Penal Code (in
short, 'IPC') and the sentence imposed and has acquitted the
applicant under Sections 3/181 and 146/196 of the Motor Vehicles
Act. The applicant has been convicted for offence under Section 287
of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo S.I. for two months
and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and offence under Section 338 of
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo S.I. for six months
and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to
further undergo simple imprisonment for 10 days on each count.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
trial Court has erroneously convicted and sentenced the applicant
and the appellate Court has also committed the same error. She
further submits that the applicant was on bail during the trial and
during appeal also. He has not misused bail granted to him. The
applicant is in jail after the judgment passed by the appellate Court.
There is no likelihood of the revision coming for hearing finally in the
near future. Therefore, sentence awarded to the applicant may be
suspended and he may be enlarged on bail. She further submits
that the applicant is ready and willing to furnish bail bonds and will
follow all the conditions imposed upon him.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the
prayer for grant of bail submitting that concurrent findings of two
Courts below are against the applicant. Hence, he is not entitled for
grant of bail.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents available on record.
Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the parties and also perused impugned judgment and the
documents available on record. Looking to the short sentence
awarded to the applicant and further looking to the reason that there
is no likelihood of this revision being heard finally in the near future,
therefore, I am inclined to allow this application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, the bail application I.A. No.1/2021 is allowed. It is
directed that substantive jail sentence imposed upon the applicant
shall remain suspended during the pendency of this revision and he
shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction
of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry
of this Court on 10.11.2021. Thereafter, he shall appear before the
concerned trial Court on a date given by the Registry of this Court
and on all such subsequent dates as would be given to the applicant
in this behalf by that Court, till disposal of the instant revision. It is
made clear that fine sentence is not suspended.
List this case for further order in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(N.K. Chandravanshi)
Judge
L/-
