Chattisgarh High Court
Dr. D. S. Dhruv vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 August, 2022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 1287 of 2022
• Dr. D. S. Dhruv, S/o Late Shri Parsuram Dhruv, Aged About 58 Years, at
Present Deputy Director Veterinary District North Bastar Kanker,
Chhattisgarh, Permanent R/o Patan Dadar, Police Station- Patewa,
District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Economic Office Wing/ Anti
Corruption Bureau Raipur, Unit Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
18/08/2022 Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, counsel for the Appellant.
Mr. Alok Nigam, G. A. for the State/respondent.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also, heard on I.A. No. 01/2022, an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 29.07.2022 passed by
learned Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act Kanker,
District- North Bastar (C.G.) in Special Case No. 01/2017, the
appellant stands convicted as under:-
Conviction Sentence In Default
U/s 13(1)(c) r/w RI for 3 years and to In default of
13(2) of Prevention pay fine amount of payment of fine,
of Corruption Act Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 420 of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 409 of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 467 of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 468 of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 471 of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
U/s 120B of IPC RI for 3 years and to In default of
pay fine amount of payment of fine,
Rs. 1000/- further 1 month
additional R.I.
All the sentences
will run concurrently
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been wrongly convicted by the trial court in the
judgment without there being any sufficient evidence available
on record. He further submits that there are several omissions
and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution
witnesses. He next submits that the appellant was on bail
during the pendency of trial and has never misused the liberty
given by the Court. Hence, it is prayed that his application be
allowed.
On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed
the bail application.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused
the record.
After perusing the impugned judgment and considering
this fact that appellant was on bail during the pendency of trial
and has not misused the liberty, I am of this opinion that it will
be proper to release the appellant on bail during the pendency
of this appeal.
Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the
appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this
appeal and he shall be released on bail on his executing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety
for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 19.10.2022. 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 subsequent dates as given to him by the said
Court, till the disposal of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey)
Judge
Ruchi
