Chattisgarh High Court
Ravi Vishwakarma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 October, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 564 of 2019
Ravi Vishwakarma, S/o Deepak Vishwakarama, aged about 20 Years, R/o
Shitlapara, Gali No. 2, Ramnagar, Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
----Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Station House Officer, Police Station Gudiyari,
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
21/10/2022 Mr. Varunendra Mishra, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Neeraj Pradhan, P.L. for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.2 of 2019, application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to the appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 06.12.2018 passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge (FTC) Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. in Special Sessions Trial
No.302/2016, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 363 of Indian Penal Rigorous Imprisonment for three
Code years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default
of payment of fine amount to
undergo further additional rigorous
imprisonment for one month
Under Section 366 of Indian Penal Rigorous Imprisonment for five years
Code and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of
payment of fine amount to undergo
further additional rigorous
imprisonment for one month
Under Section 6 of Protection of Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years
Children from Sexual Offences Act and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount to undergo
further additional rigorous
imprisonment for two months
(All sentences were directed to run concurrently)
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not
properly appreciated the overall evidence available on record for holding the
appellant guilty. He further submits that appellant is in jail since 29.11.2016
and he has already suffered more than half of the jail sentence i.e. 5 years &
10 months, the appellant is the first offender having no criminal antecedent
and disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time. Therefore, the appellant
be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the bail
application.
Father of the Prosecutrix/Victim appeared through video conferencing
with the help of DLSA, Raipur, C.G. and duly identified by the DLSA Authority.
He submits that he has objection to release of the appellant on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the
appellant at the time of incident i.e. 20 years, the fact that the appellant has
already suffered more than half of the jail sentence i.e. 5 years & 10 months,
the appellant has no criminal antecedent and that disposal of this appeal is
likely to take some time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence
imposed upon the appellant and to release him on bail.
Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.02 of 2019) 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. He shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 19.12.2022 and
thereafter appear before the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry
and thereafter continue to appear before the trial Court on all such dates as
are given to him by the said Court till disposal of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Radhakishan Agrawal)
Judge
Akhilesh
