Chattisgarh High Court
Sohan Dhruv & Others vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 June, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 390 of 2021
1. Ajay Verma @ Chhotu S/o Bhoop Singh, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village
Kesla, P.S. Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
2. Shivam Verma @ Monu S/o Anil Verma, Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Kesla,
P.S. Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. --- Appellants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Palari, District Balodabazar
Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
with
CRA No. 394 of 2021
• Piyush Verma @ Mintu S/o Arun Verma, Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Sakri,
Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer Palari, District -
Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
with
CRA No. 440 of 2021
1. Sohan Dhruv & Others S/o Bharat Lal Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Kesla,
Thana Palari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
2. Rajendra Kumar Dahriya @ Lala Dahriya @ Rajendra Diamond S/o Bodhram
Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kesla, Thana Palari, District Baloda Bazar
Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
3. Ukesh @ Rakesh Dahriya S/o Kodu Dahriya Aged About 23 Years R/o Village
Kesla, Thana Palari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
4. Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre S/o Surendra Aged About 19 Years R/o Village
Amera, Thana Palari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
5. Gopi Sahu S/o Rameshwar Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Amera,
Thana Palari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Thana In Charge Thana Palari, District Baloda
Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
15-06-2021 Mr. A.S. Rajput, counsel for the appellant/Ajay Verma and Shivam
Verma.
Mr. Sameer Singh, counsel for the appellant/Kamlesh @ Rocky
Ghritlahre and Gopi Sahu.
Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021 - applications for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail filed by appellant/Ajay Verma, Shivam
Verma, Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi Sahu.
The appellants have been convicted under the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.03.2021 passed
by Learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Balodabazar, District
Balodabazar, Bhatapara CG in Special Case No. 52/2020.
After arguing at great length, learned counsel for the appellant
-Ajay Verma and Shivam Verma seeks to withdraw the application for
suspension of sentence.
Application (IA 1/2021) is dismissed as withdrawn in CRA
No.390/2021.
Though liberty is sought, no liberty is necessary.
As far as appellants Gopi Sahu and Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre,
are concerned, learned counsel appearing for these appellants would submit
that in the entire incident of alleged gang rape of the prosecutrix PW-1 and
PW-2, the appellants Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi Sahu are not
involved in the alleged offence and this fact has been clearly stated by both
the prosecutrix PW-1 and PW-2. He would submit that their evidence clearly
shows that they were friends of these two appellants and had gone for outing
and when they were all returning together they were surrounded and blocked
by other co-accused who are alleged to have committed gang rape on the two
prosecutrix. He would also draw attention of this Court to the statements of the
prosecutrix PW-1 and PW-2 both that when other accused surrounded them,
Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi were threatened and assaulted and
they were driven away from the spot and then prosecutrix were dragged to
nearby bushes and offence was committed. Learned counsel for the
appellants would further submit that the conviction of the appellants for alleged
commission of offence under Sections 363, 354 and 376 (f) IPC and under
Sections 8 and Violation of Section 19 under Section 21 of Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, is for a maximum period of five
years. The appellants Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi are in jail after
the impugned judgment of conviction. They were on bail during the trial also.
On the other hand, learned State counsel would argue that as far as
appellants Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi are concerned, in view of
the clinching evidence on record with regard to the prosecutrix being minor in
age, it is clear that the prosecutrix were removed from the custody of their
guardians by these two appellants without their consent, and though in the
examination-in-chief it has not been clearly stated, after PW-1 was declared
hostile, she has clearly stated that when the two prosecutrix had gone for
outing with Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi, they were kissed by them.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid submission the application
for grant of bail filed by Ajay Verma and Shivam Verma is dismissed as
withdrawn.
Application of Kamlesh @ Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi is allowed
taking into consideration short period of sentence and that they were on bail
during trial and has made out an arguable case for hearing and further that
appeal is not likely to be heard early. Jail sentences of appellant Kamlesh @
Rocky Ghritlahre and Gopi shall remain suspended during the pendency of
the appeal and they shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.25,000/- each with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the concerned trial Court, for their appearance before the concerned trial
Court on 02th August, 2021 and on all such further dates as may be directed
by the said Court, interval being not less than 6 months, till final disposal of
this appeal.
List all the appeals for analogous hearing.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
Judge Judge
Pawan Prajapati
