Suresh @ Golu Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3754 Chatt

                                        1




             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                          Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 1023 of 2021

 Suresh @ Golu Yadav, Son of Sukhnandan Yadav, Aged About 20 Years,
  Resident of Ward No. 5, Achanakpur, Chakarbhatha, Police Station -
  Chakarbhatha, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.  ---- Appellant

                                    Versus

 State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station-
  Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.                ---- Respondent

16.12.2021 Shri Vipin Singh, counsel for the appellant.

Smt. Deepti Shukla, P. L. for the State.

Heard on admission.

This appeal is admitted for hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted and sentenced by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.08.2021 passed in Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No. 102/2018 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Special Court, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) as under:-

                                Conviction                       Sentence
                        Under Section 363 of IPC        R.I. for 7 years and fine
                                                        of Rs. 1,000/-, in default
                                                        of    payment    of    fine
                                                        amount      4       months
                                                        additional imprisonment.





           Under Section 366 of IPC       R.I. for 10 years and fine
                                          of Rs. 1,000/-, in default
                                          of payment of fine 6
                                          months          additional
                                          imprisonment.
           Under Section 376 of IPC       R.I. for 10 years and fine
                                          of Rs. 2,000/-, in default
                                          of payment of fine 6
                                          months          additional
                                          imprisonment.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no reliable evidence against the present appellant to involve him in this case, essential ingredient of the offence for convicting the appellant is missing, the appellant was on bail after trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him, evidence of the PW/1 Prosecutrix, PW/2, mother of the prosecutrix and PW/6 father of the prosecutrix regarding her age, disposal of this appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes bail application.

Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, looking to the evidence of the prosecutrix PW/1, PW/2 mother of the prosecutrix and PW/6 father of the prosecutrix regarding age of the prosecutrix, no specific allegations made against the appellant, final disposal of this appeal is likely to take some time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence

imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

He shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 20.04.2022 and thereafter appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry and thereafter continue to appear before the trial Court on all such dates as are given to him by the said Court till disposal of this appeal.

List the case for final hearing in due course.Certified copy as per rules. ist Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

Nadim