Raju Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6065 Chatt

                                                1

                      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                         Order Sheet

                                    CRA No.1349 of 2022

      Raju Gupta S/o Baleshwar Gupta Aged About 21 Years R/o Chandmari, Raigarh,
       Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

                                                                      ---- Appellant (On Bail)

                                            Versus

      State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ajak,
       Raigarh, District - Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

                                                                       ---- Respondent/State

28/09/2022 Shri Ashish Gupta, counsel for the appellant.

Shri Rishabh Chand Singhdeo, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Prosecutrix appears through Video Conferencing and has raised her objection regarding grant of bail to the appellant.

Heard on I.A.No.01/2022, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By virtue of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.07.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act), Raigarh, District Raigarh in Special Criminal Case under the Atrocities Act No.43/2021 (Crime No.82/2021), the appellant stands convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-

                            Conviction                             Sentence

                  Under Section 354 of I.P.C.        R.I. for one year and fine amount of
                                                     Rs.100/-, in default of payment of
                                                     fine,       additional      rigorous
                                                     imprisonment for 01 day.


     Under      Section      3(1)(w)(i)
                               of R.I. for 09 months and fine amount of
     (Scheduled          Caste & Rs.100/-, in default of payment of
     Scheduled Tribe (Prevention fine,         additional      rigorous
     of Atrocities) Act), 1989    imprisonment   for 01 day.


     Under       Section      3(1)(s)
                               of R.I. for 06 months and fine amount of
     (Scheduled          Caste & Rs.100/-, in default of payment of
     Scheduled Tribe (Prevention fine,         additional      rigorous
     of Atrocities) Act), 1989    imprisonment   for 01 day.

Under Section 323 of IPC read R.I. for 06 months and fine amount of with Section 3(2)(va)of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of (Scheduled Caste & fine, additional rigorous Scheduled Tribe (Prevention imprisonment for 01 day. of Atrocities) Act), 1989

All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that by virtue of impugned judgment, short term of jail sentence has been awarded to the appellant and contended further that during trial, he was on bail and he has never misused the terms and conditions imposed upon him by the concerned Court below and if, short term of jail sentence is allowed to run during the pendency of this appeal, the very purpose of filing this appeal itself would become infructuous. Therefore, the jail sentence as awarded to him be suspended during the pendency of this appeal.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/State has opposed the aforesaid application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record carefully.

Taking into consideration the short term of jail sentence awarded to the appellant under the impugned judgment and also taking into consideration that during trial, he was on bail and has never misused the terms and conditions imposed upon him, I am, therefore, inclined to allow this application.

Accordingly, the application (I.A.No.1 of 2022) is allowed. It is directed that the 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 of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety of like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the said Court on 22.11.2022 and, thereafter, he shall continue to appear on such further dates as are given to him in that behalf, till the disposal of this appeal.

In view of the above, I.A.No.1/2022 stands disposed of.

Post this matter for final hearing in its turn.

Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge

Tumane