Asgar Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 428 Chatt

                                                                                  NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                CRA No. 684 of 2018

    Asgar Khan S/o Ahmad Khan Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Baserakhurd,

    Outpost Dindo, Police Station Trikunda, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                          ---- Appellant

                                       Versus
    State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station

    Trikunda, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                       ---- Respondent

21.06.2021 Shri Rahul Mishra, Counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Ravish Verma, G.A. for the State/Respondent.

Heard on prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment

of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.04.2018 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District -

Balrampur- Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh) in Sessions Trial No. R.

15/2015.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the conviction

is based on the evidence of Surji Bai (PW-2) and Ajay (PW-5) who

are not at all reliable. PW-2 has admitted that she in the report and

merg lodged by her she not claimed to be eye witness and according to her report she was informed by Ajay. As well as Ajay (PW-5) is

concerned in his cross-examination he has admitted that he is a

tutored witness and whatever he has stated in the Court is tutored by

his grand mother. There is no other corroboration of any other

circumstantial evidence. The appellant has completed almost seven

years of his jail sentence, therefore he may be granted bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes and submits

that the appellant has been convicted by the learned trial Court by

relying upon the testimony of two witnesses Surji Bai (PW-2) and

Ajay (PW-5).

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties,

keeping in mind the evidence of Surji Bai (PW-2) and Ajay (PW-5),

and the submission of learned counsel for appellant that the

appellant has a case for alteration of his conviction to the offence

under Section 304 IPC and the fact that he has already remained in

jail for almost seven years, we are inclined to suspend the jail

sentence of the appellant.

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the

substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain

suspended during the pendency of the appeal and he shall be

released on bail furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with

two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the

concerned trial Court, for his appearance before the concerned trial

Court on 12th August, 2021 and 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.

Post the appeal for final hearing.

Certified copy as per rules.

                         Sd/-                            Sd/-
             (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava)        (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
                     Judge                                Judge


Yasmin