Pawan Rathore vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6818 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  Order Sheet

                             CRA No. 1030 of 2021

1. Pawan Rathore S/o Late Nanki Rathore, aged about 42 years R/o Village: Sukli,
   P.S. Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Chandrika Rathore W/o Pawan Kumar Rathore, aged about 40 years R/o
   Village Sukli, P.S. Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

3. Ku. Arti Rathore D/o Pawan Kumar Rathore, aged about 19 years R/o Village
   Sukli, P.S. Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

                                                                       ---- Appellants

                                     Versus

  State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station: Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa,
  Chhattisgarh

                                                                     ---- Respondent

15.11.2022 Mr. Sushobhit Singh, Counsel for the appellants.

Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, P.L. for the State.

Heard I.A. No. 1 of 2022, an application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.

This is the second bail application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail to the appellants. First bail application was dismissed

as withdrawn vide order dated 23.02.2022 passed in this appeal.

By the impugned judgment date 01.09.2021 passed in Session

Case No. 74 of 2019 by the learned Sessions Judge, Janjgir, District: Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), the appellants stands convicted as mentioned

below:

     Conviction                 Sentence                  In Default

U/s 302/34 of IPC        Life     Imprisonment In default of payment

                         with a fine of Rs. 200- of       fine    amount

                         200/- each.              additional RI for 10-10

                                                  days.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants

have been wrongly convicted by the Trial Court in the judgment

without there being any sufficient and clinching evidence available on

record. He submits that the conviction of the appellants is only on the

basis of oral dying declaration made by the deceased, which is

suspicious, therefore, the conviction of the appellants is not

sustainable. He further submits that the appellants are in jail since

18.10.2019 and appeal is likely to take some more time to be

finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appellants be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed

the bail application and submissions made in this respect.

We have heard the counsel for the parties, gone through the

statements of witnesses and other evidence available on record.

Considering the evidence available on record, at this stage, we are not inclined to grant bail to the present appellants.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 1 of 2022 is dismissed.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

                       Sd/-                                   Sd/-

                (P. Sam Koshy)                     (Arvind Singh Chandel)
                    Judge                                  Judge




Saurabh