Sukhnandan Banjare vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6193 Chatt

                        HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                          Order Sheet

                                       CRA No. 383 of 2018

                         Sukhnandan Banjare Versus State Of Chhattisgarh

 Division Bench:-

 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
 Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari




11.10.2022           Ms. Aditi Singhvi, counsel for the appellant.

                     Mr. Soumya Rai, PL for the State / respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.3, application for suspension of sentence and grant of

bail.

By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 17.03.2017

passed by the 5th / Special Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), District Durg,

C.G. in Special Sessions Trial No.135/15, the appellant has been convicted as

under :-

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 376(2)(f)(n) of the Imprisonment for life and fine of IPC and Section 5(ठ)(ढ) of the Rs.1000/- in default of payment of POCSO fine three months imprisonment.

Under Section 506(2) of the IPC 5 years imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/- in default of payment of fine three months imprisonment.

Ms. Aditi Singhvi, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the

appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in question and he has been convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to the record. He is in

custody since 07.09.2015, therefore, application may be allowed and appellant

may be released on bail.

Per contra, Mr. Soumya Rai, learned State counsel, opposes the prayer

raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits on the basis of

statement of prosecutrix (PW-1) who was minor at the time of incident the

learned trial Court has rightly convicted the present appellant and, as such, the

bail application of the appellant deserves to be rejected.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties considered their rival

submissions and also perused the records with utmost circumspection.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature

and gravity of offence and considering the statement of prosecutrix (PW-1) who

was minor at the time of incident and further considering the other evidence

available on record we are not inclined to grant bail to the present appellant.

Accordingly, I.A. No.3 is rejected.

                       Sd/-                                     Sd/-
               (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                       ( Deepak Kumar Tiwari )
Ankit                Judge                                           Judge