Jawahar Lodhi vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4979 Chatt

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet
                                 CRA No. 319 of 2022

• Jawahar Lodhi S/o Makhan Lodhi, Aged About 38 Years R/o Chikhli, Police Station
  Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                         ---- Appellant

                                      Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Lalbagh, District
  Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                      -----Respondent

03/08/2022 Ms. Anubhuti Marhas, counsel for the appellant/s.

Shri Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Heard on I.A.No.1, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted under the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01/01/2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No.55/2019.

Case of the prosecution is that the appellant committed rape on the prosecutrix.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC is bad in law. The statement of the prosecutrix (PW1 does not inspire confidence and the way she narrated the story is very unnatural. It is submitted that there were 3 to 4 family members present in the house where the incident happened. The appellant is 38 years of age and the prosecutrix is of 50 years. The medical report does not support the case of the prosecution. The appellant has served about 3 years of sentence awarded and the appeal is not likely to be heard early. Learned counsel relies upon medical report (Ex. P/10), spot map (Ex.P/3) and FIR (Ex. P/1) and statement of the prosecutrix and other witnesses.

On the other hand, learned State counsel objects the application and submits that the statement of the prosecutrix is clear and strong reliance can be made. Therefore, the bail application may be rejected. Learned State counsel fairly submits that in medical report, there is no recent sign of sexual intercourse and she was examined on the very next day of the incident.

Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, statement of the prosecutrix (PW1), statement of the doctor (PW8), Medical evidence (Ex.P/10), spot map (Ex.P/3) and FIR (Ex.P/1) and also considering that the appellant has already served 3 years of jail sentence and hearing of the appeal is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow the application.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1 is allowed. Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence awarded to appellant is suspended and he is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 18/10/2022. He 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 further dates as are given to him by the said Court, during the pendency of this appeal.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge

Deepti