Mithlesh Rai Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2690 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                               CRR No. 435 of 2022

• Mithlesh Rai Yadav, S/o Late Shri Satyanarayan Yadav, Aged about 31 years, R/o-
  Chopda Colony, Bishrampur, P.S.- Bishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.)

                                                                        ---- Applicant

                                     Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., Arakshi Kendra, Bishrampur, District - Surajpur
  (C.G.)
                                                                    ---- Respondent

26.4.2022 Shri Gyan Prakash Shukla, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Lalit Jangde, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent.

Heard on admission.

The revision is admitted for hearing.

Call for the records of both the Courts below.

Also heard on IA No.01/2022, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant during pendency of the revision.

The applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354 (D) of IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six month with fine of 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment of 15 days by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surajpur, District Surajpur vide judgment dated 30.03.2021 passed in Criminal Case No. 1054/2017. Against the order of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, the applicant preferred an appeal (Cr.A. No.11/2021) before Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur (CG). The learned Additional Sessions Judge, by the impugned judgment dated 18.04.2022 has upheld the judgment of the trial Magistrate in the following manner :-

    Conviction          Sentence              Fine     In  default     of
    U/S                                                payment of Fine

    354 (D) IPC Rigorous imprisonment Rs.2000/-        SI for 15 days
                for 6 month

Counsel for the appellant submits that the applicant was on bail during trial and during pendency of the appeal and he did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him. Presently, he is in custody since 05.08.2021, the date of passing of the impugned judgment. There is no likelihood of the revision coming for hearing in near future. He further submits that the applicant is ready and willing to furnish bail bonds and will follow all the conditions imposed upon him.

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

Considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties and also perused the record of the trial Court. It is stated that applicant was on bail during trial and also at the appellate stage, the maximum sentence awarded to the applicant is of one year. There appears to be no likelihood of this revision being heard finally in near future.

Looking to the above facts, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case in which substantive sentence imposed on applicant can be suspended and he can be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application I.A. No. 1/2021 is allowed. It is directed that substantive sentence imposed on the applicant/accused shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 22 nd September, 2021 and thereafter as and when directed in this behalf by the trial Court, till final disposal of the revision. It is made clear that fine sentence is not suspended.

List this case for further order in due course.

Sd/-

(N.K. Chandravanshi) Judge

Bini