Chattisgarh High Court
Rajkumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 September, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Cr.A. No. 1665 of 2019
Rajkumar S/o Harkeshwawr Uraon Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Manikpur, Amapani,
Police Station- Bango, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Bango, District-
Korba, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
28.09.2022 Shri K. P. Sahu, counsel for the Appellant.
Ms. Ishwari Ghritlahre, Panel Lawyer for the State/Respondent.
Heard on I.A. No.01/2019, an application filed under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., 1973
seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By virtue of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
23.09.2019 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) in
Session Trial No.61/2017 (Crime No.62/2017), the Appellant stands convicted and
sentenced as under:-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 304 Part-I of IPC R.I. for 10 year and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of
payment of fine additional R.I. for 2 months.
Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the Appellant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in connection with the said crime. It is contended further
that Smt. Kismatiyabai, wife of the present Appellant, was produced as eyewitness by the
prosecution but she has not supported the prosecution story yet the Appellant has been
convicted in connection with the alleged offence, which occurred on 23.09.2017. Further
contention of the learned counsel for the Appellant is that there is complete contradiction in
the version of the prosecution witnesses, as stated in FIR, police statements and also the
statement recorded before the concerned trial Court and the Appellant is in jail since
24.09.2017 and if the remaining jail sentence is also allowed to be continued, the very
purpose of filing this appeal would be defeated as the appeal will take some time for its
disposal. Therefore, the Appellant be released on bail, pending decision of this appeal.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/Respondent, while
opposing the said application, submits that the learned Court below after due
consideration of the evidence led by the prosecution, has rightly held the Appellant guilty in
connection with the alleged offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail
and, the application as framed deserves to be rejected.
I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire
record carefully.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, considering further that
the Appellant is in jail since 24.09.2017, i.e., he has served more than five years out of ten
years maximum jail sentence awarded to him and that by considering further that the
hearing of this appeal will take sometime, I am, therefore, inclined to allow the said
application.
Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2019 is allowed and 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 Registry of this Court on 21 st November, 2022 and thereafter
continue to appear before the concerned trial Court on such further dates to be given to
him by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear on such subsequent dates
as are given to him by the said Court, till the final disposal of this appeal.
I.A. No.01/2019 stands disposed of.
Let the matter be listed for final hearing in its turn.
Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/-
(Sanjay S. Agrawal)
Judge
Nikita
