Sadhe Lal Diwakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1116 Chatt

                                        1

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                  Order Sheet
                             CR.A. No. 548 of 2020
Sadhe Lal Diwakar, S/o Late Saheja Diwakar, aged about 42 years, R/o. Khanij
Nagar, Near Shiv Mandir Telibandha, P. S. Telibandha Raipur District Raipur
Chhattisgarh.
                                                                     ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur
Chhattisgarh.
                                                                 ---- Respondent

Mr. Shikhar Sharma, counsel for the appellant. 02/03/2022 Mr. Himanshu Kumar 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 10.01.2020, passed in S.T.

No.151/2018, by the learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, District-

Raipur (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
                                                 three      months        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. There is no eye-witness in this case to prove the theory of

last seen together. The recoveries that have been made from the

appellant are also not conclusive. Hence, the conviction against the

appellant is not sustainable. 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 on the

basis of the circumstantial evidence and the whole circumstances

have been proved.

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.

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