Prabhuraj Panika vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 1224 Chatt

                                              1


                      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                        Order Sheet
                                       CRR No. 262 of 2022

1.

Prabhuraj Panika S/o Shri Premsay Panika Aged About 44 Years R/o Samiti Dafai Koriya Ward No. 08, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

2. Robin Singh S/o Shri Udayraj Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Ward No. 06 Teena Dafai Udiya Mandir Koriya, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

3. Anwar Khan S/o Samiulla Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 07 Udiya Mandir Koriya, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

4. Sukhlal Sahu S/o Late Prushottam Sahu Aged About 41 Years R/o Maharajpur, Police Station Podi Chowk Nagpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

5. Vijendra Gupta S/o Shri Radheshyam Gupta Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 31 Godari Para Chirmiri, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh,

----Applicants

Versus

 Union Of India Through R P F Manendragarh, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh

----Non-Applicant

09.03.2022 Shri Dheerendra Pandey, counsel for the Applicants.

Shri Ramakant Mishra, A.S.G. for the Union of India.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No.01/2022, an application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

The applicants stand convicted under Sections 3(a) of Railway Property

(Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with

fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of payment of fine additional S.I. for 40 days

each, by way of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.02.2022

passed in Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 2020 by the Second Additional Sessions

Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.).

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants

are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further

submits that the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court without

appreciation of evidence on record is apparently contrary to law, therefore, the

applicants may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India has

opposed the application for grant of interim bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and

considering the short period of sentence awarded to the applicants, I am of the

opinion that this is the fit case in which the applicants should be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, I.A.No.01/2022 is allowed and it is directed that the

substantive jail sentence imposed upon the applicants shall remain suspended

and they shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond of

Rs.20,000/- along with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

trial Court for their appearance before the said Court on 11.07.2022 and

thereafter to continue to appear on all such dates as are given to them till final

disposal of the revision.

Post this matter for final hearing in its due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Vivek