Chattisgarh High Court
Gopal Kesharwani vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 August, 2022
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 219 of 2022
1. Gopal Kesharwani S/o Shri Bharat Kesharwani Aged About 28 Years R/o Village
Sukulpara, Kharaud, Police Station Shivarinarayan, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir-
Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
2. Sarojani Bai W/o Shri Bharat Kesharwani Aged About 60 Years R/o Village
Sukulpara, Kharaud, Police Station Shivarinarayan, Civil And Revenue
District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa,
Chhattisgarh ---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station-
Shivarinarayan, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh., District :
Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent
02.08.2022 Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, counsel for appellant.
Mr. R.C.S. Deo, PL for the State/respondent.
Heard on IA No. 01 application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail on behalf of the appellant No. 2.
By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated
04.01.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Janjgir,
District Janjgir-Champa, CG in Sessions Trial No. 131/2016 appellant
has been convicted for the ofence punishable under Section 304(B)
of IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years
and fne amount of Rs. 5000/-, plus default stipulation.
Case of the prosecution story in brief is that on 20.04.2014,
deceased namely Vandana was married with the accused/appellant
No. 1 as per their rites & rituals, she has burned on 04.09.2015
through catch fre and of her treatment she died on 05.09.2015.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no direct
evidence against the present appellant. He submits that the
statement of Purima Bai (PW-2) and Santosh Kumar Gupta (PW-4)
goes to show that there was on demand of dowry directly by the
present appellant. He was on bail during the trial and he did not
misused the liberty, appeal is likely to take some more time,
therefore, he may be entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail during the pendency of the appeal.
On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that fnding
recorded by the trial Court based on the proper appreciation of
evidence and her involvement is prove, therefore, the application may
be rejected.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to
the statement of Purima Bai (PW-2) and Santosh Kumar Gupta (PW-4)
and looking to the fact that the she was bail during the trial and she
did not misused the liberty, I am inclined to allow the application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail fled by the appellant No. 2.
Accordingly, IA No. 1 is allowed.
The substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant is
suspended during the pendency of this appeal and she is directed to
release on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
25,000/- along with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of
the concerned trial Court for her appearance before this Court on
30.09.2022. She 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 is given to her by the
said Court, till the disposal of this appeal.
List this case for fnal hearing.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
Judge
Pawan
