Chattisgarh High Court
Hemchand @ Hemu Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 244 of 2021
Hemchand @ Hemu Sahu Versus State of Chhattisgarh
Division Bench:
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
11/11/2022 Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Ruchi Nagar, Deputy Government Advocate for the respondent-State.
Heard on IA No.01, which is an application filed on behalf of the appellant
under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2021,
the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- and, in
default of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 year and also under Section
201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 03 years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of
Rs.1,000/- and, in default of fine, additional 06 month's rigorous imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in jail since
23.12.2019. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The death of deceased-
Menka Sahu was not proved to be homicidal in nature. There is no legal and
admissible evidence available on record to connect the appellant with the
aforementioned offences. He relied on Satye Singh and another vs. State of
Uttarakhand reported in (2022) 5 SCC 438 to contend that Indian Evidence Act,
1872 is not applicable in the instant case. There there are major contradiction and
omissions in the statements of prosecution witnesses and the learned trial Court has
committed grave legal error in convicting the appellant by considering irrelevant
evidence and recording perverse findings, hence, he deserves to be enlarged on
bail by suspending his jail sentence.
Per-contra, learned State counsel opposed the application and submits that
the appellant has committed murder of his second wife, namely, Menka Sahu and
further thrown her dead-body in ditch of the jungle. By taking this Court to various
prosecution witnesses coupled with other documents, learned State counsel
submits that there are ample evidence available on record to connect the appellant
with the said offences and the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant
for offence under Sections 302 & 201 of IPC, therefore, the application is liable to be
rejected.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after going through the
material available on record and especially considering the fact that the appellant
alongwith deceased- Menka Sahu went missing from 23.12.2018 till 05.01.2019 and
further failed to explain his absence during said time and have also not lodged
report when deceased was missing and further taking into consideration the further
conduct of the appellant and the findings recorded by the learned trial Court and
other material available on record, we do not find any good ground for entertaining
the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, IA No.01 is rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge Judge
[email protected]
