Sonu @ Purushottam vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4131 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                    Order Sheet

                                 CRR No. 641 of 2022

  • Sonu @ Purushottam S/o Shyam Sonwani Aged About 22 Years R/o Sant Mata
    Karma Ward, Bhatapara, Police Station Bhatapara City, District : Balodabazar-
    Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh

                                                                     ---- Applicant

                                       Versus

  • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - District Magistrate, Baloda Bazar, District :
    Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh

                                                                   ---- Respondent

30.6.2022 Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Shri Anil Gulati, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Adil Minhaj, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Call for the records of both the Courts below.

Also heard on IA No.01/2022 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant during the pendency of the revision.

By this criminal revision, the applicant has challenged the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.6.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara Distt. Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (CG) in Criminal Appeal No. H-42/2018, whereby the appellate Court has affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.7.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhatapara in Criminal Case No.567/2014 whereby the applicant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- Conviction U/S Sentence Fine In default of payment of Fine

457/34 of IPC Simple imprisonment Rs.500/- 07days SI for 06 months

380/34 of IPC Simple imprisonment Rs.500/- 07 day SI for 06 months

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that maximum sentence awarded to the applicant is six months, he was on bail during trial and also during the pendency of the appeal and after the judgment of the appellate Court he is in jail since 23.6.2022. He further submits that the applicant has already deposited the fine amount imposed upon him, he has a good case and there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in near future, therefore, sentences awarded to the applicant may be suspended and he may be released on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

Looking to the short sentences awarded to the applicant and considering the fact that the applicant was on bail during trial and appeal, as stated by his counsel and further for the reason that there is no likelihood of this revision being heard finally in near future, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to suspend the sentences and release the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application (IA No.01/2022) is allowed. It is directed that substantive jail sentences imposed upon the applicant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this revision and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 17.8.2022. Thereafter, he shall appear before the concerned trial Court on a date given by the Registry of this Court and on all such subsequent dates as would be given to the applicant in this behalf by that Court, till disposal of the instant revision. It is made clear that fine sentence is not suspended.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(N.K. Chandravanshi) Judge

Bini