Akash Kumar @ Sonu Chandrikapure vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3304 Chatt

                                       1

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                 Order Sheet
                     Criminal Appeal No. 1663 of 2017

Akash Kumar @ Sonu Chandrikapure S/o Shri Satish Kumar Chandrikapure Aged
About 19 Years R/o Minimata Nagar Jarhabhata Bilaspur P. S. Civil Line Bilaspur Tahsil
And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                         ---- Appellant
                                    Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur Police Station Incharge Civil
Line Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                       ---Respondent

06/05/2022 Shri Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Gagan Tiwari, Dy. G.A. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No. 2 of 2022, a repeat application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn on 3.5.2019 with liberty to file application for urgent hearing after completion of half of the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 22.9.2017 passed by the Learned Special Judge, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions Case No.528 of 2016, the appellant stands convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for 6 months, respectively with a direction to run all the sentences concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in jail since about more than 5 years and thus, he has completed more than half of the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him and there is no likelihood of the appeal coming up for final hearing in the near future. It is also submitted that the mother of the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case and the prosecutrix herself was a child of about 8 years, therefore, she was not a reliable witness. Hence, it is prayed that the sentence may be suspended and he may be released on bail.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail application. It is submitted that the prosecutrix (PW-1) has very clearly supported the case of the appellant on which, his conviction is based, therefore, which is also supported by the evidence of examining doctor who has opined that attempt was made to forcibly rape the minor victim. Hence, the application be rejected.

Perused the impugned judgment of the Court below. Considered on the submissions. After perusing the evidence present on record of the trial Court, I am of this view that it is not a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Consequently, the same is rejected.

List this appeal for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

Nimmi