Chattisgarh High Court
Bhojram Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 August, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Proceedings through Video Conferencing
CRR No.492 of 2021
Bhojram Sahu, aged about 30 years, S/o Shri Hirath Ram Sahu, Resident of
Parsada, P.S. Kharora, District Raipur (CG). ---Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through District Collector, Raipur, District Raipur (CG).
---Non-applicant
13.08.2021
Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Seema Dixit, Panel Lawyer for the State/non-applicant.
Heard on admission.
Issue notice to the non-applicant.
Ms. Seema Dixit, Panel Lawyer appears and accepts notice on
behalf of the State/non-applicant.
Call for the record of the Court below.
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 28.07.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No.34/2020
by learned Additional Sessions Judge/(Special Judge of Special
Court for Trial of C.B.I. Cases), Raipur (CG) whereby the appellate
Court has upheld the judgment of conviction passed by the trial
Court under Sections 279 and 338 of Indian Penal Code (in short,
'IPC') and the sentence imposed. The applicant has been convicted
for offence under Section 279 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I.
for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and offence under
Section 338 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for two years and
to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further
undergo simple imprisonment for one month 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. He
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. He 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 reason that there is no likelihood of this revision
being heard finally in the near future and other facts, I am inclined to
allow this application (I.A. No.1/2021) 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.20,000/- 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/-
