Jaylal Sao vs Cg State Power Distribution ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6280 Chatt

                                                                           Page 1 of 3

                                                                               NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                CRA No. 1572 of 2022


 1.   Jaylal Sahu S/o Santram Sahu, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Komtara PS
      Kotraroad, District Raigarh (C.G.)
                                                                        ----Appellant
                                                                             (On Bail)
                                        Versus
 1.   CG State Power Distribution Company Limited (A Successor Company Of
      Cg State Electricity Board) Through Shailendra Kumar Dubey, Junior
      Engineer (Distribution) CSPDCL Kusmura, District Raigarh (C.G.)

                                                                     ---- Respondent

14/10/2022 Mr. Priyank Rathi, Counsel for the appellant.

Heard.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Call for record of the Court below.

Issue notice to the respondent, as per rules.

Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2022, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 13/09/2022 passed by Special Judge (The Electricity Act, 2003) Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Case No. 287/2017, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 138(1)(b) of the R.I. for three year. Electricity Act, 2003.

Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and bad in law. There are major contradictions and omissions in the statements of the other witnesses. The appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted. Even after passing of the impugned judgment, the appellant has been granted bail for a limited period. The disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant be released on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that maximum jail sentence awarded to the appellant is 3 years, he was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him, after passing of impugned judgment he has been granted bail for a limited period by the Trial Court the disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, without expressing anything on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant to release him on bail.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 01/2022) is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 06th December, 2022. He shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court,

till disposal of this appeal.

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

-Sd/-

(Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge

Chandrakant