Chattisgarh High Court
Moolchand Bhainswar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 June, 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 498 of 2021
1. Moolchand Bhainswar S/o Hanuram Bhainswar Aged About 33 Years Caste Mahara R/o
Bagmohalai, P.S. Bhanpuri, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh.
2. Anil Bhainswar S/o Hanuram Bhainswar Aged About 27 Years Caste Mahara R/o
Bagmohalai, P.S. Bhanpuri, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
3. Hanuram S/o Sukalram Bhainswar Aged About 58 Years Caste Mahara R/o Bagmohalai,
P.S. Bhanpuri, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
4. Guniram S/o Domuram Aged About 33 Years Caste Mahara, R/o Village Belputi, P.S.
Karpawand, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
5. Ranuram S/o Domuram Aged About 38 Years Caste Mahara, R/o Village Belputi, P.S.
Karpawand, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
6. Devdas Baghel S/o Buti Baghel Aged About 43 Years Caste Mahara, R/o Village Belputi,
Gotigudipara, P.S. Karpawand, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
7. Manuram @ Manu S/o Late Domuram Aged About 43 Years Caste Mahara, R/o Village
Belputi, Panarapara P.S. Karpawand, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
8. Sadaram S/o Sudruram Aged About 55 Years Caste Mahara, R/o Village Belputi,
Patelpara, P.S. Karpawand, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
---- Appellants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Bhanpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
08/06/2021 Shri Vikash A. Shrivastava, Counsel for the Appellants.
Shri Ghanshyam Patel, G.A. for the State/Respondent.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Call for the record of the Court below.
Also heard I.A. No. 01/2021, application under Section 389
of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By the impugned judgment dated 25/3/2021 passed by the
2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 71/2018, appellants stand
convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 148, 323/149
and 325/149 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6
months & fine of Rs.200/-; R.I. for 6 months & fine of Rs.250/- and
R.I. for 1 year & fine of Rs.500/- respectively to each of the
appellants with default stipulations. (All sentences to run
concurrently).
Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that
the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in
the present case. It is further submitted that during trial appellants
were on bail and after the judgment of the trial Court, they were
also granted temporary bail. Therefore, it is prayed that the jail
sentence imposed upon the appellants may be suspended and
they may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
the State opposes the same and supports the judgment of
conviction.
Heard both the parties.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
for the reasons that there is no likelihood of this appeal to come up
for final hearing in near future, I am of this opinion that it will be
proper to release the appellants on bail during the pendency of
this appeal.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2021 is allowed.
It is directed that the substantive jail sentence imposed
upon the appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency
of this appeal and they shall be released on bail on each of them
furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one
solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned
Trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court
on 10.11.2021. They shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court
on a date given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to
appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to them
by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Arvind Singh Chandel)
Judge
Prakash
