Amit Ram Vishwakarma vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2441 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                               Order Sheet

                           CRA No. 63 of 2020

Amit Ram Vishwakarma S/o Mangal Vishwakarma, aged about 24 years, R/o
Village - Kumansia, Police Station: Sitapur, District - Sarguja Chhattisgarh.

                                                                   ---- Appellant

                                 Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station - Jashpur, District : Jashpur,
Chhattisgarh

                                                               ---- Respondent

21.09.2021 Mr. Varun Sharma, Counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A. for the State/Respondent.

Heard I.A. No.1/2020, an application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment date 12.12.2019 passed in

Special Criminal Case No.09/2019 by learned Special Judge,

(POCSO Act) Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, the appellant stands convicted

as mentioned below:

                  Conviction              Sentence                In Default

              U/s 363 of IPC        RI for 2 years with a In default of payment
                                    fine    amount     of of     fine    amount
                                    Rs.500/-              additional RI for 01
                                                          month.

              U/s 366 of IPC        RI for 3 years with a In default of payment
                                    fine    amount     of of    fine     amount
                          Rs.1,000/-             additional RI for 03
                                                months.

U/s 376 (2) (i) & (n) RI for 10 years with a In default of payment of IPC fine amount of of fine amount Rs.1,000/- additional RI for 03 months.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant

has been wrongly convicted by the Trial Court in the judgment

without there being any sufficient evidence available on record. He

submits that on perusal of the statement of prosecutrix, it appears

that she was a consenting party. With regard to the age of the

prosecutrix, there is no any conclusive evidence available on record

on the basis of which it can be said that she was below 18 years of

age, at the time of incident. He further submits that the appellant is

in jail since 26.02.2019 and appeal is likely to take some more time

to be finalized. Hence, it is prayed that his application be allowed.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has

opposed the bail application and submissions made in this respect.

Heard both the parties and perused the record of the Trial

Court.

I have perused the impugned judgment and statement of the

witnesses. After perusal of the statement of prosecutrix (PW-1),

Smt. Shanti Bai (PW-3) & Dashmani (PW-4). Without further

commenting on other merits of the case, I am of this opinion that it

will be proper to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the

appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this

appeal and he shall be released on bail on executing a personal

bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like

sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before

the Registry of this Court on 09.12.2021. He 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 the disposal of this

appeal.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Saurabh