Naveen Kumar Thakur vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5794 Chatt

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                     Order Sheet

                                  CRA No. 1609 of 2019

                 Naveen Kumar Thakur Versus State Of Chhattisgarh

Division Bench:-

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




15.09.2022         Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, counsel for the appellant.

                   Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Dy. G.A. for the State / respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.1/2019, application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated

19.09.2019 passed by the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge / Special

Judge under POCSO Act. Durg, District Durg, C.G. in Special Sessions

Case No.28/2018, the appellant has been convicted as under :-

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 376(2) of IPC Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine 1 month additional R.I.

Under Section 354 of IPC R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine 1 month additional S.I.

Under Section 509 of IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine 10 days additional S.I.

Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellant,

submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in

question and he has been convicted by recording a finding which is

perverse to the record. He is in custody 13.01.2018, therefore,

application may be allowed and appellant may be released on bail.

Per contra, Ms. Ruchi Nagar, learned State counsel, opposes the

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

view of the testimony of victim / prosecutrix (PW-1) and considering the

age of the victim, who was minor at the time of incident, 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 the statement of victim /

prosecutrix (PW-1) and also considering the age of the victim, who was

minor at the time of incident and further considering the other evidence

available on record we are not inclined to grant bail to the present

appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.1/2019 is rejected. However, appellant is

at liberty to file application for urgent hearing as he is jail for more than 4

years.

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