Bharat Lal And Another vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2593 Chatt

                                         1

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                              • CRA No. 574 of 2015

1. Bharat Lal S/o Aajuram Bharadwaj Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Bodsara,
   Police Station - Jaijaipur, Revenue And Civil District Janjgir Champa,
   Chhattisgarh

2. Murlidhar S/o Ramratan Chandra Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Bodsara,
   Police Station Jaijaipur, Revenue And Civil, District : Janjgir-Champa,
   Chhattisgarh

                                                                         ---- Appellants

                                     Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Police Station Jaijaipur, District Janjgir
  Champa, Chhattisgarh

                                                                         ---Respondent

28/09/2021 Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, counsel for the appellant/s.

Mr. Jitendra Shukla, P.L. for the State/respondent.

Heard on application (I.A. No.01/2019) for suspension of sentence and grant of bail of appellant No.1-Bharat Lal.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.04.2015 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.63/2014.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the circumstantial evidence of recovery of desi katta from the possession of the appellant is of no legal consequence and does not constitute incriminating evidence because there is no evidence of expert/forensic

to connect the bullet and the empty cartridge found at the spot with the weapon allegedly seized from the place said to be at the instance of the appellant. There is not even evidence that the katta was capable of being fired and no test fire was carried out.

It is further argued that the evidence of Hemant Kumar Shriwas (PW-6) that he had seen the incident from behind the curtain is wholly improbable and an afterthought because FIR was against unknown person and this witness never disclosed this fact to anybody, therefore, it is argued that the conviction is impermissible in law. The appellant has undergone more than 7 years of jail sentence, therefore, at this stage, the jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he may be granted bail as other co-accused namely Smt. Shriwas and Murlidhar have already been granted bail as against the allegation of murder.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes and submits that when the other co-accused and the present appellant were taken into custody as prime suspect, firearm was seized from under the well on the memorandum of the appellant. Even if, the evidence connecting the weapon with the bullet and cartridge is not available, the story of conspiracy disclosed in the memorandum of all the accused coupled with the evidence of Hemant Kumar Shriwas (PW-6) proves the case of the appellant being the killer beyond doubt.

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration the submission regarding absence of any evidence connecting the firearm said to be seized at the instance of the appellant with the empty cartridge and bullet in the absence of ballistic expert report or armorer's report and there being no evidence of katta being test fired and the submission that evidence of Hemant Kumar Shriwas (PW-6) is an improvement upon case diary statement as the FIR was against unknown person, we

are inclined to allow the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail of appellant No.1- Bharat Lal.

Accordingly, application (I.A. No.01/2019) for suspension of sentence and grant of bail of appellant No.1- Bharat Lal is allowed. It is directed that the substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant No.1- Bharat Lal is suspended and he 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 15.11.2021 and on all such further dates as may be directed by the said Court, interval being not less than 6 months, during the pendency of this appeal.

List the matter for final hearing.

Certified copy as per rules.

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




Ravi