Lekhram Sonwani @ Sonu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 855 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 442 of 2020

    Lekhram Sonwani @ Sonu S/o Budhram Sonwani, aged about 30 years
    R/o Village Bundeli Dihipara, Chowki Bundeli, Police Station Tendukona,
    District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Appellant

                                    Versus

    State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Office, Police Station
    Tendukona, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

                                                                  ---- Respondent

18.02.2022 Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Himanshu Sharma, P.L. for the State/Respondent. Heard on I.A. No. 2/2020, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.

By the impugned judgment date 11.06.2019 passed in S.T. No.31/2018 by the Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, District: Mahasamund (C.G.), the appellant stands convicted as mentioned below:

                  Conviction                  Sentence             In Default

                U/s 302 of IPC         Life     imprisonment In     default      of
                                       and       fine       of payment   of     fine
                                       Rs.1,000/-             amount additional
                                                              RI for six months.

It is submitted by counsel for the appellant that the conviction against the appellant is erroneous and bad in law. There is no eye witness in this case and the conviction is based only on the circumstantial evidence. The chain of circumstances has not been completely proved by the prosecution, therefore, it is prayed that the appellant be granted bail.

State counsel opposes the application. He submits that it is a case of house murder, therefore, there is a reverse burden upon the appellant in the instant case. Hence, the application be rejected.

Heard both the parties and perused the record of the Trial Court.

Considered on the submissions. Perused the evidence present in the record of the case. We are of the view that the application filed by the appellant is not fit to be allowed. Hence, the application is rejected.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

                        Sd/-                                  Sd/-
                   (R.C.S. Samant)                    (Arvind Singh Chandel)
                        Judge                               Judge




Saurabh