Amar Sahu @ Jackie Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5838 Chatt

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                    Order Sheet
                                  CRA No. 731 of 2018

• Amar Sahu @ Jackie Sahu S/o Munnu Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o- Patna City
  Sabzimandi Nalapar P.S.- Kachhkalla, District- Patna (Bihar). At Present- Nawatoli,
  Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                            ---- Appellant

                                       Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                         -----Respondent

16/09/2022 Shri Sanjay Agrawal, counsel for the appellant/s.

Shri Ashish Tiwari, G.A. for the State.

It is stated at the bar that notice issued to the prosecutrix have been made effective. No representation has been made on behalf of the prosecutrix.

Heard on I.A.No.1/18, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09/04/2018 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO), District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions Trial No.02/2017, the appellant has been convicted U/s 363 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.500/-, U/s 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.500/- and U/s 6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulation.

Case of the prosecution is that the appellant committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix who is a minor.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that conviction of the appellant is contrary to the evidence on record and is patently erroneous and bad in law. It is submitted that the prosecution has not proved the age of the prosecutrix beyond reasonable doubt. He further submits that the medical report does not support the case of the prosecution and according to him, the prosecutrix was more than 18 years at the time of incident. It is further submitted that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is of 10 years and at present, he has already served / undergone 5 years and 8 months out of total sentence awarded to him. He further submits that the appeal is not likely to be heard early, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail may be allowed during the pendency of this appeal. To buttress his submission, learned counsel placed reliance on a recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & anr. reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577.

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the prosecution, by cogent and prudent evidence, was able to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Learned trial Court, on the basis of material placed before it, came to the conclusion that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident and it is the appellant, who has committed the offence and therefore, conviction of the appellant has been sustained. The categoric finding of the trial Court goes to show that the appellant is not entitled to grant of bail during the pendency of this appeal. However, he fairly submits that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is of 10 years and he has already served / undergone 5 years and 8 months out of the total sentence awarded to him.

Having heard submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the rival contentions, perusing the records, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly detention period of the appellant, reliance placed in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) and also considering that the appeal is not likely to be heard early, this Court is of the opinion that the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail should be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2018 is allowed. The substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant is suspended and he is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- along with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 18/11/2022. He shall thereafter appear before the concerned trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such further dates as are given to him by the said Court, during the pendency of this appeal.

List this case for final hearing.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge

Deepti