Govind vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1849 Chatt

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                       Order Sheet

                       Proceedings through Video Conferencing

                              Criminal Revision No.519 of 2021

1. Govind S/o Bhau Satnami Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Dullapur, P.S.
   Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

2. Rukhmani Bai W/o Rajkumar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Dullapur, P.S.
   Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

3. Rajkumar S/o Bhau Satnami Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Dullapur, P.S.
   Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

4. Bhaudas S/o Purshottam Aged About 75 Years R/o Village Dullapur, P.S.
   Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

                                                                      ---- Applicants

                                          Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Kawardha, District
  Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

                                                                     ---- Respondent

18.8.2021 Shri Ajay Ayachi, counsel for the applicants.

Shri Dinesh Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Issue notice to the respondent.

Learned counsel for the State accepts notice on behalf of the State.

Also heard on IA No.01/2021 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicants during the pendency of the revision. The applicants have been convicted and sentenced by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Distt. Kabirdham in Criminal Case No.1554/2014 in the following manner:-

Conviction U/S Sentence Fine In default of payment of Fine

325 IPC Rigorous Rs.200/- SI for 05 days imprisonment for 03 years

323 IPC Rigorous Rs.100/- SI for 03 days imprisonment for 06 months

In an appeal (Cr.A. No.19/2016), the learned appellate Court vide judgment dated 31.7.2021 upheld the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants were on bail during the trial and after the judgment of the appellate Court they are in jail since 31.7.2021. He further submits that the applicants have a good case and there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in near future, therefore, sentence awarded to the applicants may be suspended and they may be released on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

Looking to the nature of injuries of the injured persons and specially fracture on the forth base metacarpal bone of left hand of injured Devnath and considering the fact that the applicants were on bail during trial and appeal, as stated by their counsel and further for the reason that there is no likelihood of this revision being heard finally in near future, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to suspend the sentence and release the applicants on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application (IA No.01/2021) is allowed. It is directed that substantive jail sentences imposed upon the applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this revision and they shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 06.12.2021. Thereafter, they 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 applicants 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 orders in due course.

Sd/-

(N.K. Chandravanshi) Judge

Bini