Ganesh Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5795 Chatt

                                          1


                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                                CRA No. 735 of 2021

                     Ganesh Nayak Versus State Of Chhattisgarh

Division Bench:-

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




  15.09.2022         Mr. Dharmesh Srivastava, counsel for the appellant.


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

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

grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated

25.06.2021 passed by the Special Judge under Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Fast Track Court,

Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, C.G. in Special Sessions Case

No.03/2019, the appellant has been convicted as under :-

                          Conviction                          Sentence

               Under Section 363 of IPC          R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.500/-,
                                                 in default of payment of fine amount
                                                 further R.I. for 1 month.

               Under Section 3 (2)(v) of         Imprisonment of life and fine of
               Scheduled       Castes      and   Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of fine amount further R.I. for 2 Atrocities) Amended Act, 2015 months.

Mr. Dharmesh Srivastava, 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 10.12.2018, 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 on the basis of statements of victim / prosecutrix (PW-2),

Devhuti Sahu (DW-1) and on the basis of FSL report and also

considering the age of the victim was less than 18 years at the time

of incident, the 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 statements

of victim / prosecutrix (PW-2), Devhuti Sahu (DW-1); age of the

victim was less than 18 years at the time of incident; FSL report in

which on articles A, B, C, D and E stains of semen and human sperm

were found 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 is rejected.

However, appellant is at liberty to file application for urgent

hearing.

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




Ankit