Umesh Jogi @ Chhotu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6016 Chatt

                                            1

                                                                                    NAFR

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  CRA No. 911 of 2022

 Umesh Jogi @ Chhotu, S/o Late Anjor Jogi, aged about 22 Years (Now 26 Years),
   R/o Village Pendri, Police Station Masturi, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                             ----Appellant

                                         Versus

 State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Masturi, District : Bilaspur,
   Chhattisgarh.

                                                                         ---- Respondent

26/09/2022 Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Rahul Mishra, P.L. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No.1 of 2022, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 01.06.2022 passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Special Court, Bilaspur,

C.G. in Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No.61/2018, the appellant

stands convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 363 of Indian Penal Rigorous Imprisonment for seven Code years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo further additional imprisonment for four months.

Under Section 366 of Indian Penal Rigorous Imprisonment for ten Code years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo further additional

imprisonment for six months.

Under Section 4 of Protection of Rigorous Imprisonment for life and Children from Sexual Offences Act, fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of 2012 payment of fine amount to undergo further additional imprisonment for one year.

(All sentences were directed to run concurrently)

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that as per the

statement of PW-1 Dr. Parul Jogi, she has written the age of the

prosecutrix only on the basis of memo of the police and the statement of

the PW-2 prosecutrix would clearly show that she was a consenting party

and she was a major and her age is also not proved which is evident from

the statement of PW-4 Smt. Narmada Thawait. Though the prosecution

has cited PW-4 as a seizure witness but actually no seizure was made

before her. He further submits that the prosecutrix also appeared along

with the father and made no objection to grant bail to the appellant and

also stated that the appellant and the prosecutrix were married.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail

application.

Perused the statement of the PW-1 Dr. Parul Jogi wherein she

stated that the age of the prosecutrix would be in between 14-21 years as

per the number of dentures. Statement of PW-2 prosecutrix is also

perused as also the statement of PW-4 Smt. Narmada Thawait by whom

the prosecution proved the age.

Having considered the statement of PW-4, it appears that the

certificate showing age of the prosecutrix does not seize before her;

further considering the statement of PW-2; and also considering the fact

that she and her father have not objected before this Court; and the fact

that the appellant is in jail since 01.06.2022; the appellant was on bail

during trial; and disposal of this appeal is likely to take some time, without

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are 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.01 of 2022) 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 to the satisfaction of the trial

Court. He shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 28.11.2022

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.

                         Sd/-                            Sd/-
                     (Goutam Bhaduri)               (Radhakishan Agrawal)
                          Judge                           Judge




Akhilesh