Chattisgarh High Court
Sanjay Kumar Bhagat @ Bhola vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 October, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 302 of 2020
Surendra Kumar S/o Balgovind, aged about 25 years, Resident of Village-
Basantpur, (Patelpara), Police Station- Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj
Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Basantpur,
District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
WITH
CRA No. 480 of 2020
Sanjay Kumar Bhagat @ Bhola S/o Bilas Ram Panika, aged about 24 Years R/o
Village and Police Station: Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant.
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through- District Magistrate, Balrampur, District Balrampur-
Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
26.10.2021 Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Keshav
Dewangan and Mr. Arun Shukla, Counsel for the respective
appellants.
Mr. Aditya Sharma, P.L. for the State/Respondent.
Heard I.A. No.1/2020, an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
By the impugned judgment date 04.12.2019 passed in
Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No.24/2017 by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District: Balrampur-Ramanujganj,
Chhattisgarh, the appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:
Conviction Sentence In Default
U/s 363, 366 of IPC. RI for 7-7 years with In default of payment
a fine amount of of fine amount
Rs.1,000-1,000/- additional RI for 3-3
months each.
U/s 6 of POCSO Act, RI for life In default of payment
2012 (POCSO) imprisonment and of fine amount
fine of Rs.5,000/- additional RI for 1
year.
As per the prosecution case, the victim was subjected to
forceful rape, she being minor, the conviction order has been
passed.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
victim in this case has been examined as PW-1 and the statement
of PW-1 if compared with the statement given to the police, which is
exhibited as D-1, it would show that the material improvement has
been made. It is further contended that initially the victim has stated
that she was abducted by way of motor-cycle. Whereas, in the
Court statement, she has stated that she was forcefully taken by
four-wheeler. He would further submit that about the assault, at the
date, the further improvement has been made which would make
the statement unreliable. He would further submit that Para cross
examination of the witness, Para 25, 26 & 27 would show that
material about omission was made in the police statement which is
corroborated by the PW-9, the I.O., therefore, the conviction in this
case is being made without appreciation of the evidence of PW-1
and the I.O, PW-9.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the
argument and submitted that the factum of rape is not been
rebutted and the victim has maintained that stand, therefore, the
conviction is well narrated.
Perused the statement of victim, PW-1, Prima Facie after
reading the Para 6 of the examination chief, Para 25, 26 & 27 of
cross-examination, it appears that about the forcible sexual
intercourse, positive statements have been made. The date of birth
is proved by Exhibit P-6 as 22.12.2002, as she is minor of 14-15
years. The finding of the Court below as for the consideration of
suspension is not appear to be prima facie wrong. Considering the
same, subject to the final adjudication of this case we are at this
stage not inclined to allow the application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly I.A. No.1/2020 is dismissed.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Goutam Bhaduri) (Arvind Singh Chandel)
Judge Judge
Shubham/Saurabh
