Chattisgarh High Court
Sunny Sunani vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 July, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1265 of 2019
• Sunny Sunani, S/o Late Padma @ Padman Sunani, Aged about 20 years,
R/o Housing Board, B.S.U.P. Colony, Khalbada Saddul, Block No. 33, House
No. 44, Police Station - Vidhansabha, District Raipur (C.G.).
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station-
Vidhansabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).
---- Respondent
27.07.2021 Mr. Arvind Kumar Dubey & Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, counsel
for the appellant.
Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy. A.G. for the State/Respondent.
Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, Advocate on behalf of
complainant/victim had appeared through video conferencing
from the Help Desk of the Court.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Also heard I.A. No. 01/2019, an application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 08.07.2019 passed in
Special Criminal Case No. 160/2017 by the 7th Additional
Sessions Judge, District- Raipur (C.G.) the appellant stands
convicted as mentioned below:
Conviction Sentence In Default
U/s 06 of the RI for 10 years and In default of
POCSO Act, 2012 fine amount of payment of fine
Rs.5,000/-. 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 there is no conclusive evidence which
shows that on the date of incident the age of the victim was below
18 years, therefore, conviction of the Appellant is not sustainable.
He also submits that the Appellant was on bail during trial and
during trial both the appellant and the prosecutrix have performed
marriage at Arya Samaj Mandir, Raipur (C.G.). He further submits
that at present the prosecutrix is residing with the parents of the
appellant. He lastly submits that the Appellant is in jail since
08.07.2019. 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.
Learned counsel appearing for the complainant has
supported the bail application of the Appellant and submitted that
he has no objection on grant of bail to the Appellant.
Heard both the parties.
I have gone through the entire record and the statement of
the prosecutrix. After perusal of the statement of prosecutrix (PW-
02) and considering this fact that the prosecutrix is residing with
the parents of the Appellant and further considering the fact that
the Appellant is in jail since 08.07.2019, for these reasons, I am
of this opinion that it will be proper to release the Appellant on bail
during the pendency of this appeal.
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 executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like
sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance
before the Registry of this Court on 08.11.2021. 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.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Arvind Singh Chandel)
Judge
Vasant
