Bhagirathi Seth vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 997 Chatt

                                        1

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                  Order Sheet
                             CR.A. No. 937 of 2021
Bhagirathi Seth, son of Tarasar Seth, aged about 67 years, resident of Village
Arjunda, Post and Thana Saraypali, District - Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh).
                                                                     ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station Saraypali, District - Mahasamund
(Chhattisgarh).
                                                                 ---- Respondent

Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, counsel for the appellant. 23/02/2022 Mr. Anmol Sharma, P.L. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No.2, application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 25.09.2014, passed in S.T.

No.57/2013, by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, District-

Mahasamund (C.G.) in the following manner :-

             U/s. 302 of the I.P.C.            : Life imprisonment and fine of
                                                 Rs.1000/- and in default of
                                                 payment of fine, further undergo
                                                 one        month         rigorous
                                                 imprisonment more.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit

that the conviction against the appellant is totally erroneous and

without the evidence of prosecution brought beyond reasonable

doubt. The conviction is based only on the evidence of Yashoda

(P.W.-8), who is the mother of the deceased and therefore, she is

interested witness, hence, she was not reliable and trustworthy.

Hence, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellant may

be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail. It is submitted that the

prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the

eye-witness account of Yashoda (P.W.-8) is very clear and

categorical, which is un-rebutted. Hence, the application be

rejected.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the records of the trial Court.

Considered on the submissions and perused the evidence

present in the record of the case. Considering the same we are of

this opinion that it is not a fit case to suspend the sentence and

release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No.2, application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail, is rejected.

List this case for final hearing in due course along with Cr.A.

NO. 1183 of 2014.

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