Kaliram Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7341 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                   Order Sheet
                              CRA No. 620 of 2022

Kaliram Sahu, S/o. Late Shri Soap Singh Sahu, Aged About 56 Years, R/o.
Pandripani (Raiyatvadi) Police Station Sihava, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                              ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Police Station Sihava, Tahsil And District-
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                            ---- Respondent

06.12.2022 Mr. J.A.Lohani, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Heard on I.A.No.1, application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted by the judgment dated

02.02.2022 passed by the learned Court below in Special Criminal

Case No.14/2019 in the following manner with a direction to run the

sentences concurrently.

                     Conviction                                  Sentence

              U/s. 363 of I.P.C.            : R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.500/- in
                                               default of payment of fine, 6 months
                                               additional R.I.

              U/s. 366 of I.P.C.            : R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.500/- in
                                               default of payment of fine, 6 months
                                               additional R.I.

U/s. 6 of POCSO Act, : R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- 2012 in default of payment of fine, 6 months additional R.I.

U/s. 3 (2) (5) of SC & ST : R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1000/- (Prevention of Atrocities) in default of payment of fine, 6 months Act, 1989. additional R.I.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has

been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the trial

Court by recording perverse finding has convicted the appellant and

the appeal will take some time for hearing; therefore, the appellant may

be released on bail.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail. He submits that appellant has

rightly been convicted by the trial Court for the aforesaid offences by

considering the admissible evidence available on record.

Taking into consideration the statement of the victim and further

taking into age of the victim, who is minor, aged about 4 years, at the

time of offence and considering the statement of Dr. Smt. Aabha

Hishikar (PW-19), who had examined the minor victim on the date of

offence and also considering the FSL report (Ex.P-32) in which in

article 'E' which is undergarment of the accused, sperm was found,

we do not find that it is a fit case to suspend the sentence and grant

bail to the appellant. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 is rejected.

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



Ashok