Chattisgarh High Court
Deepak Kumar Arya vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 October, 2022
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 381 of 2021
Deepak Kumar Arya, S/o Shri Ramapati Arya, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Kachiya
Madiya Pakar Bhinda, Police Station Paterwa, District- Kusi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh
At present resident of Bapu Nagar, Sector 11, Zone -2, Khursipar and House of
Shambhu Yadav, Bijli Nagar, Bhilai -3, Police Station- Bhilai-3, District- Durg (C.G.)
---- Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer Police Station Old Bhilai,
District- Durg (C.G.)
---Respondent
18.10.2022 Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. R.M. Solapurkar, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent.
Heard on application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail
to the appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 15.03.2021 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Third Fast Track Special Court
(POCSO Act) Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) in Special Session Trial
(POCSO Act) No. 72/2019, the appellant stands convicted, as under:-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 363 of IPC : R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 500/- in
default of payment of fine 50 days
additional imprisonment.
U/s 342 of IPC : R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 500/- in
default of payment of fine 50 days
additional imprisonment.
U/s 354 of IPC : R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in
default of payment of fine 100 days
additional imprisonment.
U/s 354B of IPC : R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in
default of payment of fine 100 days
additional imprisonment.
U/s 8 of POCSO Act : R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in
default of payment of fine 50 days
additional imprisonment.
All the sentences to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned
trial Court has not considered contradiction and omission of the
statement of the victim wherein she has not fully supported case of the
prosecution, still he has been convicted for commission of offence
punishable under Sections 363, 342, 354, 354B of IPC & Section 8 of
the POCSO Act. He would further submit that during trial the appellant
was remained in jail from 16.04.2019 to 22.01.2020 i.e. 9 months 6 days
and after judgment passed by the trial Court on 15.03.2021 till today.
Thus, he has already undergone for 2 years 4 months and 20 days
whereas the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is 5 years.
He would also submit that there is no likelihood of the appeal coming up
for final hearing in the near future, hence, it is prayed that the
application be allowed.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail application submitting
that there is clinching evidence of the prosecution to prove guilt of the
accused and nothing has been brought on record to rebut the evidence
adduced by the victim and the trial Court has rightly convicted the
appellant, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for grant of bail.
Considering the fact that the appellant has already undergone half
of the sentence and also considering the fact that the appeal being of
the year 2021, final hearing of the same will likely to take time, I am
inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant and release him on
bail.
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 12th 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 the
disposal of this appeal.
List this appeal for final hearing in the month of March, 2023.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Arun
