Manoj Ghritlahre @ Dau vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 344 Chatt

                                                1

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                    Proceedings through Video Conferencing
                                  Order Sheet
                              Criminal Appeal No. 1652 of 2019
       Manoj Ghritlahre @ Dau S/o- Nitin Kumar Ghritlahre, Aged about 20 years, R/o- Atal
        Awas, Ghughri Road Kawardha, Police Station Kawardha, Present Address- Village
        Joratal, Police Station Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                                               ----- Appellant
                                           versus
       State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                                     ----- Respondent/State

20/01/2022 Shri Dinesh Tiwari, Advocate for the Appellant.

Shri Chitendra Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. Heard.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No. 1 of 2019:

This is a bail application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 07.11.2019 passed by the Special Judge

(POCSO Act), FTC, Kabirdham (C.G.) in Special Sessions Trial No. 97/2018, the

appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

                                   Conviction                           Sentences
                        Under Section 363 of IPC             R.I. for four years and fine of
                                                             Rs.500/-, in default of payment

of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month Under Section 366 of IPC R.I. for four years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month Under Section 376 (2) (n) of R.I. for ten years and fine of IPC Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for four months Under Section 6 of POCSO Act R.I. for ten years and fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for four months All the sentences to run concurrently

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly

considering the evidence available on record against the appellant, the age of

the prosecutrix, statements of the parents & the prosecutrix, and the date of birth

of the prosecutrix mentioned in school record is 12.10.2003, I am not inclined to

suspend the jail sentence and to release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 1 of 2019 is dismissed.

List this appeal for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

vatti