Chattisgarh High Court
Kishore Das Manikpuri vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 November, 2022
Page 1 of 5
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 305 of 2022
Kishore Das Manikpuri son of Madhudas Manikpuri, aged about 24 years,
resident of Trimurti Nagar, Manjhi Para, Police Station - Devendra Nagar,
Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station - Civil
Line, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondent
30.11.2022 Mr. Pradeep Rathore, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Abhiyonnati Singh, P. L. for the State/respondent.
Heard.
This Court vide order dated 11.03.2022 has directed for issuance
of notice to the victim for appearance before this Court through
concerned District Legal Services Authority on 18.04.2022. But,
despite service of notice to the victim, she did not appear on that day.
Thereafter, the matter was posted for 25.04.2022. On that day also,
she did not appear, then again the matter was listed on various dates
i.e. on 22.8.2022, 21.09.2022 & 09.11.2022, but she did not make her
appearance before this Court. Thus, finally the matter is heard today
on application for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the
appellant during pendency of the appeal.
Heard on I.A. No. 01/2022, which is an application for
suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the appellant.
By the impugned Judgment dated 30.12.2021 passed by
Additional Sessions Judge, First Fast Track Special Court, Raipur in
Special Criminal Case No. 192/2018, the appellant stands convicted
and sentenced as under:
S. Conviction Sentences
No.
1. Under Section 363 of Indian Rigorous Imprisonment for 3
Penal Code years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in
default of payment of fine
amount, to further undergo RI
for one month.
2. Under Section 366 of Indian Rigorous Imprisonment for 3
Penal Code years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in
default of payment of fine
amount, to further undergo RI
for one month.
3. Under Section 376 (1) of Rigorous Imprisonment for 10
Indian Penal Code years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-,
in default of payment of fine
amount to further undergo 3
months RI.
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has
been falsely implicated in this case, as he has not committed the
alleged crime. He further submitted that there are various
contradictions and omissions in the statements recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C. and the statement recorded before the Court. He also
submits that the victim, in paragraph 9 of her statement recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C., has stated that she along with the appellant
have gone to Jabalpur; they have stayed there from 13.09.2018 to
16.9.2018 and were roaming here and there and at
night, they are taking rest at Bus Stand only, thereafter, on 17.09.2018
they came back to Raipur and on 20.09.2018, they have been arrested
by the Police. She stated that during that period, the appellant has not
committed any illegal act with the victim. It is further submitted that,
victim, in paragraph 2 of his court statement, stated that the the
appellant has threatened her and she is not remembered that the how
appellant has taken, which place to her. Thus, there is vast
contradiction and omission in the statement of victim/prosecutrix
recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and the court statement. He
further submitted that the prosecution has also examined the Dr. Smt.
Rajni Chourasia (PW-3), in which, she has stated that she is unable to
give any definite opinion about the sexual assault with the victim. The
prosecution has also examined Head Master of the School, in which,
she was studied, he has placed Dakhil Kharij Register (Ex.P-13) on
record of the school in order to prove the age of the victim/prosecutrix
at the time of incident but he has admitted in his cross-examination
that at the relevant point of time he was not posted in the school and
he is not aware of the fact that who has recorded the date of birth of
the victim/prosecutrix in the School Dakhil Khariji Register, therefore,
he could not give any exact opinion about the date of birth on the date
of incident. He would further submit the the appellant is in detention
about one year and five months and appeal is of the year 2022 and
appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, therefore, remaining jail
sentence may be suspended till disposal of this appeal.
On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes submissions
of the counsel for the appellant and would submit that there is clinching
evidence of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
appellant, therefore, the bail application of the appellant deserves to be
rejected.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Looking to the evidence available on record, it is quite vivid that
there are vast contradictions and omissions in the statements recorded
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and the statement recorded before the
Court, which does not inspire confidence of this Court, as in one hand,
she has stated that she had gone to Jabalpur on 13.09.2018 alongwith
the appellant and returned back to Raipur on 17.9.2018, thereafter, on
20.9.2018 they have been arrested by the police. In the meantime, the
appellant has not made any sexual assault with her, this statement has
been made in paragraph 64 of the statement, which has been made by
her before the Court, on the other hand she has stated that the
appellant has committed sexual intercourse with her. If the Court see
the evidence of Dr. Smt. Rajni Chourasia (PW-3), who has medically
examined the victim/prosecutrix, she has not given any exact opinion
with regard to sexual assault made by the appellant. Further
considering the fact that, date of birth of the victim has not been
property proved or exhibited, even if the date of birth the
victim/prosecutrix, which is to be taken into consideration, it comes to
17 years and 11 months, as observed by the trial Court. Thus, taking
into consideration the entire material available on record, I am inclined
to allowed the appellant to release him on bail accordingly, the
application (IA No.1 of 2022) is allowed.
Accordingly, application for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail is allowed and it is directed that execution of further substantive jail
sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he 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 trial Court
for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 13th January,
2023. He shall thereafter appear before Registry of this Court on a
date to be given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to
appear on all such subsequent dates as are given to him by the
Registry of this Court till the disposal of this appeal.
List this appeal for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
amita
