Chattisgarh High Court
Paras Nath Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 22 October, 2021
Page 1 of 3
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1220 of 2021
1. Paras Nath Yadav S/o Shri Jawahir Lal Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o.
Village Nougai, Police Station Sonhat, District Koriya (C.G.).
----Appellant
(On Bail )
Versus
2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Sonhat, District Koriya (C.G.).
---- Respondent
22/10/2021 Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, Counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Shakti Singh Thakur, 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 30/09/2021 passed by Special
Judge (SCST Prevention of Atrocities Act) Baikunthpur, District Koriya
(CG.) in Special (Atrocities) Case No. 32/2018, the appellant stands
convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 354 of Indian R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 100/-, in
Penal Code. default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Under Section 354(A) of R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 100/-, in
Indian Penal Code. default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Under Section 294 of Indian R.I. for 3 months and fine of Rs. 100/-,
Penal Code. in default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Under Section 506 of Indian R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 100/-,
Penal Code. in default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Under Section 323 of Indian R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 100/-,
Penal Code. in default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Under Section 384 of Indian R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 100/-, in
Penal Code. default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 15 days.
Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is
per se illegal and bad in law. The FIR has been lodged belatedly without
any explanation. 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
despited 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 1 year, 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 December, 2021. He
shall thereafter continue to appear before the Trial Court on a date to be
given by the Registry of this Court and shall 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
