Chattisgarh High Court
Kawal Ram And Another vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 3 September, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 565 of 2016
1. Kawal Ram And Another S/o Manmohan Nagesiya Aged About 40 Years R/o
Village Sarudhab, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Fulmet Bai W/o Kawal Ram Nagesiya Aged About 40 Years R/o Village
Sarudhab, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellants
Versus
• The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station Bagicha,
District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
03-09-2021 Mr. Aman Kesharwani, counsel for the appellant/s.
Ms. Akshara Mishra, PL for the State/respondent.
Heard on I.A. No. 01/2020 application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
The appellants have been convicted and sentenced by the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.12.2015 passed
in Session Trial No. 45/2015 by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC),
Jashpur, District Jashpur, CG in the following manner:-
1. U/s 302/34 of the IPC For life imprisonment and fine of Rs.
500/- in default of payment of fine 3
months R.I. (to both the appellants)
2. U/s 323/34 of the IPC R.I. for 3 months and fine of Rs. 200/- in
default of payment of fine 1 months R.I.
(to both the appellants)
It is submitted on behalf of the appellants that his previous
application filed was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.11.2016. It is
submitted by the counsel for the appellants that appellants are in jail
since more than six years. The appeal has not been listed for final
hearing till date. The appellants have a good case. The statement of the
eye witness (PW-7) clearly shows that the injuries was inflicted by the
juvenile offender Mukesh on the injured witness as also on the
deceased. The injured witness (PW-14) has himself admitted in his
statement that after suffering injuries he fell down and he became
unconscious. Further, the weapon of assault in this case was only a club
therefore, it cannot be held that the appellants and the other offenders
had any intention to cause death. All the incidents have occurred in a
quarrel all of sudden. Therefore, the offence of murder against the
appellants is not made out. Conviction against them in bad in law. It is
prayed that the appellants, at this stage, may be granted bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the application and
submits that the there is clear and categorical statements of the injured
eye witness (PW-14) and the other eye witness (PW-7) against the
appellants. The conviction against the appellants is based on the
evidence of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt therefore, the
application is liable to be rejected.
Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties,
perused the record of the trial Court and deposition of the witnesses
and after overall consideration, looking to the length of the detention of
the appellants in jail, we are of the view that appellants should be
granted bail.
Accordingly, IA No. 01/2020, application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail is allowed.
It is directed that the jail sentence imposed upon the appellants
shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they
shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the
trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 29th
of November, 2021. They shall thereafter 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.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
Judge Judge
Pawan Prajapati
