Ram Kumar Rathiya vs The State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2052 Chatt

                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                           CRA No. 1812 of 2018

               Ram Kumar Rathiya, S/o Shivnath Rathiya, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village
                Geraon, Police-Station-Kartala, District-Korba, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                                       ---- Appellant

                                                   Versus

               The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station-Kartala,
                District-Korba, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                                   ---- Respondent

27/08/2021 Mr. Aditya Khare, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Samir Oraon, Govt. Advocate for the State.

Heard on IA No.1/2020, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Earlier application filed was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court on 4.4.2019 and liberty was granted to the appellant to file repeat application after completion of two years in jail By the impugned judgment dated 12/10/2018 passed by the Sessions Judge, Korba , District-Korba(C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.- 93/2017, the Appellant stands convicted as under:-

Conviction Sentence

U/s 307 of IPC. : R.I. for 10 years & fine amount of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine further 3 months additional simple imprisonment.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the conviction against the applicant is erroneous and without the presence of the evidence of prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant has now completed about 3 years in jail. The conviction against the appellant is bad in law. On the basis of the evidence of the prosecution case, the offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out. The examining doctor Dr. O.S. Kanwar(PW-9) has reported that injuries caused to the victim were of grievous nature and therefore he is not reported regarding the fatality of the injuries, hence, the appellant has good case to argue hence, it is prayed that he may be released on bail during the pendency of trial.

On the other hand, Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submits that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and there is no ground for allowing the prayer of this appellant, therefore, the application be rejected.

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the trial Court.

Considered on the submissions. After perusing the evidence present on the record of the trial on that basis the appellant is in jail since more that 3 years and for the reason there is likelihood of delay in final hearing of this appeal, I am of this opinion that it will be proper to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on him executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 22/11/2021. He 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 him by the said Court, till the disposal of this appeal.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nisha