Baiju Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5274 Chatt

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                 Order Sheet
                            CRA No. 385 of 2021
    Baiju Yadav, S/o Dilip Yadav, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Rani Road,
    Sivni, Police Station Champa, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
                                                              ---- Appellant
                                    Versus
    State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Station House Officer, Police Station
    Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
                                                           ---- Respondent

k

22/08/2022 Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A. for the State/Respondent.

Heard on IA No. 03/2022 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.

This is the second bail application, the first bail application of the Appellant was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same after a year vide order dated 12.07.2021 of this Court.

By the impugned judgment dated 05/03/2021, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) in Session Case No. 68/2019, arising out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2019 passed in Criminal Case No.435/2019 passed by learned JMFC, Champa, District Janjgir Chama, whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant under Sections 306 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, with default stipulation.

Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the Appellant has wrongly convicted by the Court below without there being any clinching and sufficient evidence available on record. He further submits that there was a love relationship between the Appellant and the deceased and on the date of incident they both have talking with each other and brother of the deceased was also present there. It also appears that the deceased herself proposed the Appellant for marriage and the Appellant had refused for the same, therefore, the deceased set herself on fire by pouring kerosene oil and committed suicide. The Counsel further submits that if the entire case of prosecution taken as it is, even then the Section 306 of the IPC is not made out against the Appellant. The deceased was instigated by the Appellant is not established, therefore, the conviction of the Appellant is not sustainable. The Appellant is in custody since 05.03.2021 and appeal is likely to take some time to finalize, therefore, looking to the jail sentence awarded to him, he may be released on bail.

On the other hand State counsel opposes the bail application.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

Considering the evidence adduced by the parties and further considering the detention period of the Appellant, without further commenting on other merits of the case, I am of the view that it is fit case for grant of bail to the Appellant.

Accordingly, the bail application (IA no. 03/2022) is allowed.

It is directed that the substantive jail sentence imposed upon the Appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this Appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 12.12.2022. 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 are given to him by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.

List this case for final hearing in due course

Sd/-

Shubham                                            (Arvind Singh Chandel)
                                                           Judge