Kulwant Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4976 Chatt

                          HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                         ORDER SHEET
                                       CRA No. 679 of 2018
    Kulwant Sahu S/o Tulsi Ram Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Hardibahra,
     Police Chowki Balangi, Police Station Raghunath Nagar, District Balrampur-
     Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.                                    ---- Appellant
                                                 Versus
    State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Raghunath
     Nagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh.                ---- Respondent

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

03.08.2022 Shri A.N. Pandey, counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Arijit Tiwari, Panel Lawyer for the State/Respondent.

Heard on I.A No.01/2022, an application filed under Section 389 (2) of

Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

This this the second bail application and the first bail application was

dismissed as withdrawn on 14.08.2018, with liberty to revive the same after

two years, in case the appeal is not decided on merit.

By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 27.03.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Rananujganj(C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.31/2011, the Appellant stands convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine amount further R.I. for 2 years (Fine amount has been deposited before the Court below).

Learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that the case is based only on the previous land dispute between the parties and the conviction of the Appellant is based on the eye witnesses of the case, who are the relative witnesses and their evidence is not reliable and does not inspire confidence. PW-3, Rajendra Prasad and PW-6, Shivprasad were the seizure witnesses and they have already turned hostile. In this case no F.S.L. Report was produced before the Court below as to whether, bloodstains found on the axe (Tangiya) is a human blood or not and, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in the matter and he is not involved in the crime in question and submits further also that the Appellant was on bail during trial and presently, he is in jail since 27.03.2018, and therefore, he may be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned state counsel opposes the bail application on the submission that taking into consideration particularly, the statements of Usha Devi (PW-4) and Sona Mati (PW-5), both are the main eye witnesses of the case, the present appellant is not entitled to be released on bail.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record carefully.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as also considering the material available on record, particularly, statements of main eye witnesses i.e., Usha Devi (PW-4) and Sona Mati (PW-

5), we are not inclined to release the Appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A No.01/2022 is rejected.

                     Sd/-                                                  Sd/-
               (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                                  (Sanjay S. Agrawal)
                    JUDGE                                                 JUDGE




vivek