Ramprasad Bariha vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7240 Chatt

                     HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                         Order Sheet

                                     CRA No. 1636 of 2021

                         Ramprasad Bariha Versus State Of Chhattisgarh

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey




02.12.2022           Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, counsel for the appellant.

                     Mr. Ashish Tiwari, G.A. for the State / respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.2, application for suspension of sentence and grant of

bail.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

18.08.2021 passed by the Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012), Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, C.G. in Special

Criminal Case No. H-27/2021 appellant has been convicted for the offence

under Section 5(2)(ठ)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo

R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine six

months additional R.I.

Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that

the appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in question and he has

been convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to the record. He is in

custody since 07.04.2021, therefore, application may be allowed and

appellant may be released on bail.

Per contra, Mr. Ashish Tiwari, learned State counsel, opposes the

prayer raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on the

basis of statement of prosecutrix (PW-1), who was minor at the time of

incident, and FSL report (Ex.P/22) the learned trial Court has rightly convicted

the present appellant and, as such, the bail application of the appellant

deserves to be rejected.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival

submissions and also perused the records with utmost circumspection.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,

nature and gravity of offence and considering the statement of prosecutrix

(PW-1); age of the prosecutrix (PW-1), who was minor at the time of incident;

FSL report (Ex.P/22) in which on articles A, C & D i.e. slide of the prosecutrix,

slide & underwear of the appellant respectively, stains of semen and human

sperm were found and further considering the other evidence available on

record, we are not inclined to grant bail to the present appellant. Accordingly,

I.A. No. 2 is rejected.

                        Sd/-                                     Sd/-
               (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                     ( Rakesh Mohan Pandey )
                     Judge                                       Judge




Ankit