Neelkaran Tandan @ Chingu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5272 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                    Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 665 of 2022

 • Neelkaran Tandan @ Chingu S/o Badri Tandan Aged About 20 Years R/o
   Village - Ranchirai, Police Station - Ranchirai, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                       ---- Appellant

                                       Versus

 • State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Ranchirai, District - Balod,
   Chhattisgarh.

                                                                     ---- Respondent

22/08/2022 Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, counsel for the appellant.

Ms. Usha Chandrakar, P.L. for the State.

Pursuant to the order dated 18.04.2022, the prosecutrix along with her mother had appeared on 09.05.2022 through DLSA, Balod and made her objection regarding the grant of bail to the appellant.

Heard on I.A. No.01/2022, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment dated 08.04.2022 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO), Balod, District - Balod (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 58/2019, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

              S.No.       Offence                        Sentences

               1.     U/s 363 of IPC    R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 500/- in

default of payment of fine amount further R.I. for 1 month

2. U/s 366 of IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine amount further R.I. for 2 months.

3. U/s 6 of POCSO R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of fine amount further R.I. for 6 months.

All the sentence will run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and is falsely implicated in the case and there is no material evidence against the appellant. There is the contradiction between the statement of u/s 164 and u/s 161 of the prosecutrix. He further submits that the appellant is in jail since 19.06.2019 and disposal of this appeal will likely to take some time, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the appellant did a heinous crime and the prosecutrix along with her mother has also made her objection regarding the grant of bail to the appellant.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record and the nature of offence, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail.

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

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey) Judge H.L. Sahu