Chattisgarh High Court
Ajay Lal Begi & Another vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 570 of 2020
1. Ajay Lal Begi S/o Late Daya Shanker Lal Begi, R/o Village Bhim
Dogari, P.S. Motinaka, Distt. Mandla (MP)
2. Sunita Lal Begi W/o Ajay Lal Begi, R/o Village Bhim Dogari, P.S.
Motinaka, District Mandla (MP)
Presently R/o Rawabhantha, Khamtarai, District Raipur CG
---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Azad Chowk,
District Raipur CG
--- Respondent
23-11-2022 Shri Pawan Shrivastava, counsel for the appellants.
Shri Neeraj Pradhan, PL for the State/respondent.
Heard on I.A. No. 1/2020 application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
By this criminal appeal, the appellants have challenged the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3-3-2020 passed by the
Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Special Court, Raipur in Special Criminal Case No.
128/2017, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced as under :-
Appellant No. 1 - Ajay Lal Begi
Sr. Section Act Jail sentence Fine sentence Default stipulation
No. RI Rs. RI
1 363 r/w. 34 IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
2. 363A r/w IPC 5 years 1,000/- One month
3. 365 r/w 34 IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
4. 366A r/w IPC 5 years 1,000/- One month
5. 376(2)(झ) IPC 10 years 5,000/- Three month
(ढ)
6. 370(5) r/w IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
7. 374 r/w 34 IPC 1 year 500/- Fifteen days
Appellant No. 2 - Sunita Lal Begi
Sr. Section Act Jail sentence Fine sentence Default stipulation
No. RI Rs. RI
1. 6 r/w 17 POCSO 10 years 5,000/- Three months
Act
2 363 r/w. 34 IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
3. 363A r/w IPC 5 years 1,000/- One month
4. 365 r/w 34 IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
5. 366A r/w IPC 5 years 1,000/- One month
6. 370(5) IPC 3 years 1,000/- One month
7. 374 r/w 34 IPC 1 year 500/- Fifteen days
All the jail sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are in jail
since 16-3-2017, thereby they have served more than half of jail sentence
imposed on them. They have a good case on merit in their favour. There is no
likelihood that this appeal may be heard finally in near future. Hence, he prays
that the substantive jail sentences imposed on the appellants be suspended
during pending of this appeal and they be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the
bail application.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned
judgment.
After perusing the impugned judgment, considering the evidence available
on record and period of sentence served by the appellants, this Court is of the
opinion that it is a fit case to suspend the jail sentences and release the
appellants on bail.
Accordingly, IA No.01/2020 is allowed.
It is directed that execution of substantive jail sentences imposed on the
appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they
shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in a sum of
Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
The appellants shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 18-1-2023 and
thereafter they shall appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the
Registry in this behalf and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent
dates as are given to them by the said Court, till the disposal of the appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(N.K. Chandravanshi)
Judge
Pathak
