Chattisgarh High Court
Omprakash Sahu @ Chotu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 March, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 413 of 2022
1. Omprakash Sahu @ Chotu S/o Raju Sahu Aged About 18 Years R/o Mahaveer Ward,
Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
2. Akash Soni @ Chote S/o Kamlu Soni Aged About 18 Years R/o Mahaveer Ward,
Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bhatapara (Town), District Baloda Bazar
Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh -----Respondent
08.03.2022 Shri Vijay Shankar Mishra, counsel for the Appellants.
Shri Shrestha Gupta, P.L. for the State/Respondent.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record of the Court below.
Also heard on I.A. No.01/2022, an application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
By way of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
05.02.2022 passed in Special Criminal Case No.H-42/2019, Appellant No.1
Omprakash Sahu @ Chhotu has been convicted under Section 354-A, 354-D,
341, 323/34 (on two counts) and 509 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for 2
years with fine of Rs.300/- and in default of payment of fine, undergo additional
RI for one month under Section 354-A IPC, to undergo RI for 2 years with fine of
Rs.300/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for one month under Section
354-D IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month with fine of Rs.300/-
and in default to further undergo SI for 3 days under Section 341 IPC, to undergo
RI for one year with fine of Rs.300/- each and in default to undergo further RI for
one month each under Section 323/34 IPC and to undergo SI for one year with
fine of Rs.300/- and in default to further undergo SI for one month under Section
509 IPC. Similarly, Appellant No.2, Akash Soni @ Chhote has been convicted
under Sections 354-A, 354-D, 341/34 and 509 of I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo RI for two years with fine of Rs.300/- and in default to undergo RI for
one month under Section 354-A IPC, to undergo RI for two years with fine of Rs.
300/- and in default to undergo RI for one month under Section 354-D IPC, to
undergo SI for one month with fine of Rs.300/- and in default to undergo SI for 3
days under Section 341/34 IPC and to undergo SI for one year with fine of
Rs.300/- and in default to undergo one month SI under Section 509 IPC. All the
sentences are ordered to run concurrently.
Counsel for the Appellants submits that the appellants have remained in
Jail from 10.10.2019 to 15.10.2019. Trial court has granted them bail for a period
of 30 days, the appeal is likely take some time for its final disposal and looking to
the short term sentence awarded to both the Appellants, they may be enlarged
on bail.
On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of
bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment
impugned.
Taking into consideration the short term of sentence awarded to both the
Appellants and also taking into consideration that the appeal is likely to take
some time for its final disposal and trial Court has granted bail for a period of 30
days to them, I am inclined to allow this application.
The application is accordingly allowed and it is ordered that the
substantive jail sentence imposed upon both the appellants shall remain
suspended during pendency of this appeal and they shall be released on bail on
each of them furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for
the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance
before the said Court on 08.04.2022 and thereafter, they shall continue to appear
on all such further dates as are given to them in that behalf till final disposal of
this appeal.
Post this matter for final hearing in its due course.
Sd/-
(N.K. Chandravanshi)
Judge
Vivek
