Budhu Agariya vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2571 Chatt

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                    Order Sheet
                                  CRA No. 236 of 2020
  • Budhu Agariya S/o Ramlal Agariya Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Saruvat,
    Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.
                                                                       ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
  • State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District Balrampur
    Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.                                ---- Respondent

27-09-2021 Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, counsel for the appellant/s.

Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, PL for the State/respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2020 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 13.01.2020 passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (under POCSO / FTC),

Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, CG in Special Sessions Trial (POCSO)

No. 26/2016.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the evidence

of the prosecutrix (PW-2) is apparent that the prosecutrix was a

consenting party. It is next submitted that the prosecution evidence

based on entries made in the Dakhil Kharij register, radiologist report

and the oral evidence do not inspire confidence and make it doubtful

regarding the age of the prosecutrix being less than 18 years of age on

the date of alleged commission of offence.

On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose and submit that the determination regarding age of the prosecutrix is based

not only on the oral evidence of the father but also the entries made in

the Dakhil Kharij register, the radiologist report by the concerned doctor.

According to him, the age of the prosecutrix was less than 18 years of

age.

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for

the parties, particularly taking into consideration the evidence with

regard to the age of the prosecutrix we do not consider present to be fit

case for grant of bail at this stage. Therefore, we do not find a case for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail, application is therefore,

rejected.

List this appeal for final hearing.

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



Pawan Prajapati