Chattisgarh High Court
Deepak Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 October, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Cr.A. No. 549 of 2022
Deepak Sahu S/o Teejaram Sahu Aged About 21 Years Through- Police Station,
Takhatpur District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Appellant
(In Jail)
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Takhatpur District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---Respondent
21.10.2022 Shri Karan Kumar Baharani, counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Abhiyunnati Singh, P.L. for the State/respondent.
Heard on I.A.N0.01/2022, an application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail to the appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 13/07/2021 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (POCSO), District- Bilaspur (C.G.) in
Special Session Trial No. 60/2017 by which the appellant stands convicted, as
under:-
Offences Sentence
U/s. 363 of the I.P.C. R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 200/- in
default of payment of fine further R.I. for 6
months.
U/s. 366(K) of the I.P.C. R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 200/- in
default of payment of fine further R.I. for 6
months.
U/s. 5(L)/06 of POCSO R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 500/- in
R/W/ u/s. 376(2) (N)
default of payment of fine further R.I. for
01 years.
of I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the appellant would draw attention of this court to
the statement of the victim P.W.-1 wherein the she has stated that she was
carried by the accused in a Motor Cycle from Takhatpur to Shahdol which is
200 KM from Takhatpur and she has not raised any alarm during the journey
from Takhatpur to Shahdol and even in the evidence in her cross-examined
she was stated that she knew the accused from childhood as he residing
nearby her house. In the cross examination she has further stated that she
was kept in a room for one month but she had not stated before the trial court
that she has made any attempt to escape from the custody of the accused,
therefore, the appellant may be released on bail.
On the other hand learned counsel state vehemently opposes the bail
application and would submit that the victim is a minor, therefore any consent
given by her cannot be terms as legally consent for sexual intercourse.
Learned counsel for the State would further submit that prosecution has prove
the case of the appellant within the four corners of law, therefore, the
punishment awarded to the appellant is justified. Hence, the bail application
filed by the appellant may be rejected.
I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record of the court
below.
Considering the submission and fact of the case, particularly the
evidence of the victim and appellant is in jail for 3 years and 6 months, I am
inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant and release him on bail.
I.A. No.01/2022 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 her
executing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like
sum to the satisfaction of trial Court for her appearance before the Registry of
this Court on 13th 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.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
