Sannu Ram Nagvanshi vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5563 Chatt

                                            1
                                                                      CRA No. 517 of 2020



                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     Order Sheet

                                 CRA No. 517 of 2020

      Sannu Ram nagvanshi S/o Mangalu Ram Satnami, aged about 67 years, R/o
       Kadaro Mouhari Para P.S. Bagbahar District, Jashpur, C.G.  Appellant

                                         Versus

      State Of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Bagbahar District -
       Jashpur, C.G.                                                  Respondent

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

06.09.2022 Mr. A.N. Pandey, counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. G.A. for the State / respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.2, application for suspension of sentence and grant

of bail.

The appellant stands convicted for offence under Section 302 of IPC

and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.500/-,

in default of payment of fine to further 6 months R.I. by the impugned

judgment dated 27.02.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,

Patthalgaon, District Jashpur, C.G. in Sessions Trial No.18/19. The

appellant has challenged the same in this appeal.

Mr. A.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the

appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in question and he has been

CRA No. 517 of 2020

convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to the record. He is in

custody 29.03.2019, therefore, application may be allowed and appellant

may be released on bail.

Per contra, Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned State counsel, opposes the

prayer raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on the

basis of FSL report (Ex.P/18); on the basis of fact that appellant and

deceased were seen last together, and other evidence 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 medical report particularly

taboret (wooden block) (पपढढ) by which appellant has assaulted the

deceased and further considering the FSL report (Ex.P/18) in which on

articles C, D & E i.e. taboret (wooden block) (पपढढ), dhoti & banyan of

appellant, respectively, stains of blood was found; further considering the

fact that appellant and deceased were seen last together and also

considering the other evidence available on record, we are not inclined to

grant bail to the present appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.2 is rejected.

                       Sd/-                                     Sd/-
                 (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                  (Sachin Singh Rajput)
Ankit                  Judge                                  Judge