Jeetu Khatik vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3061 Chatt

                                                                              Page 1 of 2


                                                                                  NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                CRA No. 1219 of 2021

1.    Jeetu Khatik S/o Shambhu Prasad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Bada Bazar
      Chirmiri, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya (C.G.).
                                                                            ----Appellant


                                        Versus
2.    State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police
      Station Chirmiri, District Koriya (C.G.).
                                                                      ---- Respondent

09/11/2021 Mr. Anil Gulati, Counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Afroz Khan, P.L. for the State/respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 24/09/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.S.C.) Manendragarh, District Koriya (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 15/2019, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 363 of Indian R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in Penal Code. default of payment of fine additional R.I.

for 1 month.

Under Section 354 of Indian R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in Penal Code. default of payment of fine additional R.I.

for 1 month.

Under Section 8 of the R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in Protection of Children from default of payment of fine additional R.I. Sexual Offences (POCSO) for 1 month.

Act, 2012.

(All the sentences were directed to run concurrently)

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has passed the impugned judgment by overlooking the major contradictions and omissions in the statements of the witnesses, without there being any cogent evidence proving the guilt of the appellant. The appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty. Even after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment, he has been granted bail for a limited period. The maximum jail sentence imposed on the appellant is of 3 years and disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant be released on bail.

On the other hand, State counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the bail application of the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the deposition of the prosecutrix who is 9 years old which finds corroboration from the medical evidence as well, nothing is there to suggest false implication of the appellant, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant and to release him on bail. Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 01/2021) is rejected.

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

-Sd/-

                                                            (Gautam Chourdiya)
Chandrakant                                                       Judge