Manoj Kumar Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4128 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                               Order Sheet

                    Criminal Appeal No.1419 of 2021

 Manoj Kumar Yadav Age 22 years S/o Sukdeo Yadav, Caste Rawat, Resident
 of Village Ulnar Sanjay Nagar Para, Police Station Nagarnar, District Bastar
 (Chhattisgarh)

                                                                      -----Appellant

                                  Versus

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station House Nagarnar, District Bastar
Jagdalpur (Chhattisgarh)

                                                                 -----Respondent

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

30/6/2022 Mr.Gajendra Kumar Sahu, counsel for the appellant.

Mr.Ashish Tiwari, G.A. for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.01 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant during pendency of this appeal.

By this impugned judgment, the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.)/Special Judge (constutited under the POCSO Act), Bastar at Jagdalpur in Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No.06/2020 convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 363 & 506 Part-2 of the IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Chidren from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter called as 'POCSO Act') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month, R.I. for one and R.I. for twenty years and fine of Rs.10000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for five months. He has challenged the same in this appeal.

Mr.Gajendra Kumar Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that the victim was minor on the date of offence and there is no evidence to connect the appellant in offence in quetion and as such, he has been convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to record.

On the other hand, Mr.Ashish Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State, would submit that the victim was admittedly minor on the date of offence, which is clear from school admission register (Article-1) which is proved by Narayan Singh Kashyap (PW-4) by which date of birth of the victim is proved to be 2.8.2005 and as per date of offence i.e. 09.11.2019, she was 14 years 3 months and 7 days and FSL report (Ex.P-32) also proves the presence of spermatozoa on undergarments of the victim and presumption would be available under Section 29 of the POCSO Act and he has rightly been convicted and as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

Taking into consideration the nature & gravity of offence particularly taking the view that the victim was minor on the date of offence as per school admission register (Article -1) which is proved by Narayan Singh Kashyap (PW-4) and as per date of offence i.e. 09.11.2019 she was less than 15 years and FSL report (Ex.P-32) has supported the case of the prosecutoin and as such, we do not consider it a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Accordingly, I.A.No.01/2021 is rejected.

                Sd/-                             Sd/-
         (Sanjay K. Agrawal)             (Sachin Singh Rajput)
               Judge                           Judge




B/-