Ramuram Khunte vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3097 Chatt

                                                                          NAFR
              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                  Order Sheet
                             CRA No. 1268 of 2021


1.    Ramuram Khunte S/o Dauwaram Khunte, Aged About 35 Year,s R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

2.    Govind Banjare S/o Itwari Banjare, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District - Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

3.    Suresh Kumar Mathur S/o Uttra Kumar Mathur, Aged About 33 Years R/o
      Village Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

4.    Sandeep Kumar Mathur S/o Ashok Kumar Mathur, Aged About 21 Years R/o
      Village Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

5.    Dilip Kumar Mathur S/o Uttra Kumar Mathur, Aged About 28 Years R/o
      Village Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

6.    Duleshwar Chandel S/o Bisnath Chandel, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

7.    Jiwan Ram Khunte S/o Itwari Ram Khunte, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

8.    Sheet Kumar Khunte S/o Jainarayan Khunte, Aged About 25 Years R/o
      Village Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

9.    Jainarayan Khunte, S/o Jhujhuram Khunte, Aged About 77 Years R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

10.   Ashok Kumar Mathur S/o Bitthal Ram, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village
      Kopedih, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).

                                                                  ----Appellants
                                    Versus
1.    State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Station House Officer, Police Of Police
      Station - Bhakhara, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh).
                                                                ---- Respondent

11/11/2021 Mr. Praveen Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Anil Gulati, Counsel for the appellants.

Dr. (Ms.) Veena Nair, Dy. Advocate General for the State.

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

By the impugned judgment dated 08/10/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Link Court, Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) in special ST No. 08/2018, the appellants stand convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 148/149 of R.I. for 1-1 year and fine of Rs. 250 - Indian Penal Code. Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 1-1 month.

Under Section 332/149 of R.I. for 1-1 year and fine of Rs. 500 - Indian Penal Code (6 times). Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 1-1 month (6 times).

Under Section 333/149 of R.I. for 3-3 years and fine of Rs. 500 - Indian Penal Code. Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 3-3 months.

(All the sentences were directed to run concurrently)

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and bad in law. The trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses which has been overlooked by the Trial Court. The appellant were on bail during trial and even after passing of the impugned judgment they have been granted bail for a limited period and they did not misuse the liberty granted to them. There is every likelihood that disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellants be released on bail.

On the other hand, State counsel opposes the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the appellants i.e. 35, 20, 33, 21, 28, 24, 40, 25, 77 & 45 years respectively, the maximum sentence awarded to the appellants are of 3 years, the fact that the appellants were on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to them, the entire fine amount has already been deposited, the disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, without expressing anything on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon the appellants and to release them on bail.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 01/2021) is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of 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 in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court 14th Feruary, 2022. They shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and then 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 its due course.

-Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

Chandrakant