Chattisgarh High Court
Vikant Lakda vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1439 of 2021
Vikant Lakda S/o Filmon Lakda Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Belsonga, Police
Station Narayanpur, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh), District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellant.
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bagicha, District
Jashpur Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
7-
1-11-2022 Mr. Ramayan Yadav, counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Ishwari Dhritlahre, PL for the State.
Heard on I.A.No.1 of 2021 which is an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
The appellant stands convicted by the Judgment dated 30-10-
2021 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Jashpur/Additional Incharge (FTC), Jashpur in Special POCSO Case
No 30 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo RI for three years and fine of Rs.1,000/-
in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for 15 days,
Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and
fine of Rs.1,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI
for 15 days, and Section 376(1) of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI
for 10 years and fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine
amount to undergo further RI for 15 days. All the sentences are
directed to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
victim/prosecutrix (PW/2) has turned hostile as well as the eye-
witnesses PW/4, mother of the victim and PW/5 have turned hostile.
Conviction of the appellant is solely based on the medical report
submitted by the Doctor V Bhakla (PW/3). He would further submit
that from bare perusal of the medical report it is reflected that in
the report it is mentioned that the injuries present on Vulva vagina
and hymen shows that sexual intercourse has been committed on
the victim within a week. The medical report further provides that
no any external injury was found on the body of the prosecutrix and
only internal injury is present. He would further submit that there
omissions and contradictions in the statements of the
victim/prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C.
He further submits that the appellant is in jail since 10-10-2020 and
after pronouncement of the judgment dated 30-10-2021 upto to till
date and hearing of appeal on merits will take some time,
therefore, the appellant may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
Perusal of the statements of the victim/prosecutrix and the
witnesses recorded before the trial court, shows that there are
some omissions and contradictions in the statement of the
victim/prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 wherein
the she denied the offence of crime.
Considering the statement of the victim/prosecutrix recorded
under sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C.,where there are some
omissions and contradictions, the fact that the appellant is in jail
10-10-2020 and also the fact that hearing of appeal will take some
time, I am inclined to allow the application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No. 1 of 2021 is allowed and it is directed that
the execution of further substantive jail sentence shall remain
suspended and the appellant shall be released on bail on his
executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in
the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance
before the Registry of this Court on 15-12-2022. He shall thereafter
appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry
of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such
subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court till the
disposal of this appeal.
Cc as per rules.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Raju
