Vinod Kumar Besara vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1362 Chatt

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                              CRA No. 1837 of 2019

• Vinod Kumar Besara, S/o Rajkumar Besara, Aged about 21 years, R/o Village
  Bansala, Bhoipara, Police Station- Bhanupratappur, District- North Bastar
  Kanker (C.G.).                                             ---- Appellant

                                     Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Police Station- Bhanupratappur, District- North
  Bastar Kanker (C.G.).                                      ---- Respondent

26.07.2021 Mr. Ashok Kumar Swarnakar, counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. Sushil Sahu, P.L. for the State/Respondent. Heard on admission.

Also heard I.A. No. 01/2020 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 21.07.2017 passed in Sessions Case No. 47/2016 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanupratappur, District- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) the Appellant stands convicted as mentioned below:

                   Conviction                Sentence           In Default
              u/S 376(1) of IPC       RI for 10 years and In     default       of
                                      fine      amount   of payment   of     fine
                                      Rs.1,000/-.          amount     additional
                                                           RI for 03 months.

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. He submits that the statements of the prosecutrix i.e PW-01 and other witnesses is not reliable. On perusal of the statements of witnesses it also appears that there was previous enmity between both the parties, that is why, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this present case, therefore, conviction of the Appellant is not sustainable. He lastly submits that the Appellant is in jail since 23.03.2016. 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) and her brother namely Kriteshwar (P.W.-06), 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.01/2020 is rejected. List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Vasant