Kamta Patel vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3173 Chatt

                                                                           Page 1 of 3

                                                                              NAFR
               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                   Order Sheet
                              CRA No. 1396 of 2021


1.   Kamta Patel S/o Budhelal Patel, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Fekari,
     Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.).
                                                                        ----Appellant
                                                                            (On Bail )
                                      Versus
2.   State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.).
                                                                 ---- Respondent

16/11/2021 Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Shrestha Gupta, P.L. for the State/respondent.

Heard.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Call for record of the Court below.

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

By the impugned judgment dated 13/09/2021 passed by Upper Session Judge, 4th F.T.C. Special Court, Durg, District Durg (CG.) in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 01/2019, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 354 of Indian R.I. for 2 year and fine of Rs. 3,000/-, Penal Code. in default of payment of fine additional S.I. for 1 month.

Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and bad in law. There are major contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecutrix and other witnesses. The appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted. He has already deposited entire fine amount. Even after pronouncement of the impugned judgment he has been granted bail for a limited period. The disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant 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 fact that maximum jail sentence awarded to the appellant is 2 years, he was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him, 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 appellant and to release him 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 appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his 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 his appearance before the Registry of this Court 16th February, 2022. He 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 him by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

-Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

Chandrakant