Vicky @ Prakash Nag vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2581 Chatt

                                     1



             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               Order Sheet
                    Criminal Appeal No. 230 of 2019
Vicky @ Prakash Nag S/o Late Shri Baldau Nag Aged About 22 Years R/o Village
Nagpara (Basin), Police Station Fingehswar , District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ---- Appellant
                                 Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Of Police Station Fingeshwar, District
Gariyaband Chhattisgarh.
                                                                  ---Respondent

27/09/2021 Shri Govind Dewangan, Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Alok Nigam, G.A. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No. 1 of 2021, a repeat application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 8.5.2019 with liberty to repeat the same after half the period of sentence of imprisonment is undergone by the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 26.11.2018 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Case No. 55 of 2016, the appellant stands convicted with a direction to run all the sentences concurrently, as under:-

Conviction Sentence Under Section 363 of the : R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for 2 months.

Under Section 366 of the R.I. for 4 years and to pay fine of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for 2 months.

Under Section 6 of the R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Protection of Children from Rs.500/-, in default of payment of Sexual Offences Act, 2012. fine, to further undergo RI for 2 months.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has completed half of the sentence in jail and the conviction against him is bad in law. The deposition of the prosecutrix (PW-1) clearly shows that she had willingly gone and resided with the appellant, therefore, no case is made out against the appellant. Hence, it is prayed that the application be allowed.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail application. It is submitted that the prosecution has proved that the prosecutrix was minor on the date of incident, therefore, her willfulness and consent is immaterial. Hence, it is prayed that the application be rejected.

Perused the impugned judgment of the Court below.

Considered on the submissions. After perusal of the evidence in the record of the trial Court, I feel inclined to allow the I.A. No. 1 of 2021, a repeat application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Consequently, the same is allowed.

It is directed that the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 13.12.2021 and thereafter before the concerned trial Court

on a date to be fixed by the Registry and on all such subsequent dates as would be given by that Court till final disposal of this appeal.

List this appeal for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

Nimmi