American Cherwa vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1286 Chatt

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 1941 of 2019

  American Cherwa S/o Shivbalak Cherwa Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Atauri,
  Jogidihpara, Police Chowki Dawra, P.S: Pasta, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                         ---- Appellant

                                     Versus

  State of Chhattisgarh through District Magistrate, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                      ---- Respondent

22.07.2021 Mr. Dev Ashish Biswas, Counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy. A.G. for the State/Respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2019, an application for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.

By the impugned judgment date 28.11.2019 passed in S.T.

No.36/2017 by the learned Additional Session Judge,

Ramanujganj, District: Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) the

Appellant stands convicted as mentioned below:

                 Conviction                Sentence                 In Default

             U/s 5 (ठ)/6          of RI for 10 years and In default of payment of
                                     fine   amount     of fine amount additional
             POCSO Act.
                                     Rs.1,000/-.          RI for 03 months.
 U/s 506 of IPC        RI for 02 years and In default of payment of
                      fine   amount     of fine amount additional
                      Rs.500/-.            RI for 02 months.

Both the sentences will run concurrently

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant

has been wrongly convicted by the Trial Court in the judgment

without there being any sufficient evidence available on record.

Referring to the statement prosecutrix, it has been argued by the

counsel that prosecutrix was a consenting party and with regard to

the age of the prosecutrix, only entries of Dakhil Kharij Panji is

available and author of the said Dakhil Kharij Panji has not been

examined. Prosecutrix as well as her mother both were unable to

state exact date of birth of the prosecutrix, therefore, there is no

any clinching evidence available on record on the basis of which it

can be said that at the time of alleged incident, prosecutrix was

below 18 years of age, therefore, conviction of the Appellant is not

sustainable. He lastly submit that Appellant is in jail since

06.09.2017 and appeal is likely to take some more time. Hence, it

is prayed that his application be allowed.

On the other hand, Learned counsel for the State has

opposed the bail application and submissions made in this

respect.

Heard both the parties.

I have perused the judgment as well as statements of

witnesses and other evidence adduced by the prosecution before

the Trial Court. After perusal of the statements of prosecutrix (PW-

01), her mother and brother namely Yashoda (PW-02) Upendra

Yadav (PW-03), I am of this opinion that it is not a fit case for

grant of bail to the Appellant during the pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2019 is rejected.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Saurabh