Vijay Das vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2100 Chatt

                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                          Order Sheet

                                         CRA No.537 of 2020

     Vijay Das S/o Sukhnath Das Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Lamni Jamgudapara
     Thana Parpa District Bastar Chhattisgarh                       ---- Appellant

                                             Versus

     State Of Chhattisgarh Through Aarakshi Kendra Parpa District Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh                        ---Respondent

02/09/2021 Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava with Mr. Varunendra Mishra, Advocates for the appellant/s.

Mr. Ravish Verma, G.A. for the State.

Heard on application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.03.2020 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) in Session Trial No.48/2019 for the offence as follows :

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 376(2)(L) R.I. for 20 years and fine amount of of IPC Rs.25000/- in default of fine amount, additional R.I. for 6 months.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the conviction of the appellant has been ordered despite a clear statement made by the prosecutrix a major that the sexual intercourse was consensual in nature and she has admitted suggestion that she was not prepared to lodge report but her father compelled to lodge report so that money could be extracted and even they had taken money from the appellant.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail and argues that in the medical report and the evidence of the doctor, it has come that the prosecutrix was mildly unstable and abnormal and mentally retarded also therefore, the consent would not be a free consent. He would further submit that trial Court has recorded finding that before sexual intercourse the parties had consumed liquor therefore, the consent given in intoxicated condition also cannot be said to be free consent within the meaning of Section 375 of IPC.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration the age of the prosecutrix and what she has stated in her own cross-examination and that prosecution has not led the evidence of any psychiatrist, we are inclined to allow the application.

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for his appearance before the concerned Trial Court on 7th of October, 2021 and on all such further dates as may be directed during the pendency of this appeal and thereafter in interval which shall not be less than six months.

List this case for final hearing.

                        Sd/-                                             Sd/-
           (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava)                         (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
                       Judge                                            Judge
Rekha