Chattisgarh High Court
Dharmendra Nishad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1258 of 2022
1. Dharmendra Nishad S/o Vishram Nishad Aged About 24 Years R/o - Bagichapara
Ramkund, Police Station - Azad Chowk Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Jitendra Nishad S/o Vishram Nishad Aged About 21 Years R/o Devar Dera, Aama Talab
Dhaal, Police Station - Azad Chowk Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Azad Chowk
Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
12/08/2022 Ms. Smita Jha, counsel for the appellants.
Shri Sameer Oraon, Govt. Adv. for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.1 of 2022, application for suspension of sentence under
Section 389 of CrPC and grant of bail to the appellants.
By the impugned judgment dated 23/07/2022 passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge/(Special Judge of Special Court for Trial of CBI Cases) Raipur
(C.G.) in Session Case No.163/2021, the appellants stand convicted and
sentenced as under :-
Conviction Sentence
Appellant No.1 R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.
1000/-. In default of payment of
Under Section 307 of Indian fine further rigorous imprisonment
Penal Code for 3 months.
Under Section 25(1-b)(b) of R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.
Arms Act. 1000/-. In default of payment of
fine further rigorous imprisonment
for 3 months.
Section 27(1) of Arms Act R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.
1000/-. In default of payment of
fine further rigorous imprisonment
for 3 months.
Appellant No.2 R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.
1000/-. In default of payment of
Under Section 307/34 of fine further rigorous imprisonment
Indian Penal Code for 3 months.
All the sentences are run
concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants were on bail
during the trial and the maximum sentence is three years and there is material
contradiction and omissions in the statement of the witnesses, therefore, the
conviction is bad in law. At present the appellants on suspension of sentence and
granted bail by the trial Court, appellants has already undergone 231 days as
submitted by the counsel for the appellants, appeal is likely to take time, therefore
they may be granted suspension of sentence.
On the other hand learned counsel for the State submits that after due
appreciation the judgment of conviction and award of sentence was passed,
therefore, it does not require any interference, hence the application for
suspension of sentence may be rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Looking to the maximum sentence awarded, the appellants were on bail
during trial and did not misuse the liberty, appeal is likely to take some time, I am
of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon
the appellants and to release them on bail.
Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.1 of 2022) is allowed.
It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence imposed upon
the appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and
they shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.10,000/- each with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the
trial Court. They shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 12/10/2022 and
thereafter shall appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry
and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to
them by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.
The appeal is admitted.
Call for the record.
List this appeal for final hearing.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
JUDGE
Kamde
