Bidur Vishvakarma vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 920 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 321 of 2021

    Bidur Vishvakarma S/o Sukhdev Vishvakarma, aged about 25 years, R/o
    Karamdand Charcha, Police Station - Charcha District - Koriya
    Chhattisgarh.

                                                               ---- Appellant

                                       Versus

    State of Chhattisgarh through The Station House Officer, Police Station -
    Sonhat District - Koriya Chhattisgarh.

                                                            ---- Respondent

WITH

CRA No. 339 of 2021

Santoshi Vishvakarma D/o Balamsai Vishvakarma, aged about 18 years R/o Village Pusla, Police Station Sonhat, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.

---- Appellant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station: Sonhat, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

---- Respondent

22.02.2022 Mr. A.N. Pandey, Mr. Vikram Kumar Dixit, Counsel for the respective appellant.

Mr. Himanshu Sharma, P.L. for the State/Respondent. Heard on I.A. No. 1/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the Appellant.

By the impugned judgment date 04.01.2021 passed in Sessions Case No.103/2018 by the Sessions Judge (FTC), District: Koriya (C.G.), the appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:

     Conviction                   Sentence               In Default

   U/s 302/34 of IPC       Life     imprisonment In       default      of
                           and        fine      of payment     of     fine
                           Rs.5,000/-              amount additional
                                                   RI for six months.

   U/s 120 (B) of IPC      Life     imprisonment In       default      of
                           and        fine      of payment     of     fine
                           Rs.5,000/-              amount additional
                                                   RI for six months.

It is submitted by counsel for the appellants that the conviction against the appellants is erroneous and bad in law without their being evidence of prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that conviction against the appellants are based on the extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence. There is likelihood of delay in final hearing of this case, therefore, it is prayed that the appellant be granted bail.

State counsel opposes the application and submits that the learned trial Court has made close scrutiny of the evidence of extra- judicial confession and all the circumstances, therefore, 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