Chattisgarh High Court
Ajju Rajwade vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 February, 2023
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 1076 of 2021
Ajju Rajwade S/o Dhaneshwar Rajwade, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
Village Sidhma, Police Chowki Bariyon, Police Station Rajpur, District
Balrampur Ramanuganj, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Station Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate, for the appellant.
16.02.2023 Mr. Himanshu Kumar Sharma, P.L. for the State.
Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, which is an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Sections 363, 366 of IPC & Section 4 of Protection of children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years with fine of
Rs.5,000 u/s 363, RI for 5 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- u/s 366 of IPC and RI
for 7 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- u/s 4 of POCSO Act, with default
stipulations, vide judgment dated 15.09.2021 passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Ramanujganj, District
Balrampur-Ramanujganj in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 40/2019.
Learned counsel for appellant submits that out of the maximum
sentence of 7 years the appellant has already undergone more than half of the
sentence imposed. He submits that the appeal being of the year 2021 there is
no likelihood of its early final disposal. He further submits that the age of
appellant was just around 19 years when the incident occurred. He submits
that in spite of notice being served to the victim, there is no representation on
her behalf to oppose the bail application and therefore it has to be presumed
that she is not opposing the bail application. Thus, prayed for grant of bail to
the appellant.
State counsel, however, opposing the bail application submits that the
offence against the appellant is one under POCSO Act and the victim was a
minor aged around 14-15 years at the time of incident and therefore it may not
be proper for releasing the appellant on bail at this juncture.
Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of
records, admittedly the appellant herein has undergone for a period of 3 years
& 7 months out of the maximum sentence of 7 years i.e. more than half of the
sentence awarded by the trial Court and also considering the fact that the
appellant was only around 19 years at the time of commission of offence and
that the appeal being of the year 2021 there is no likelihood of its an early final
disposal, this Court is of the opinion that prima facie, a strong case for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant is made out.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail 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
will be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with two sureties in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned
trial Court. The appellant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each
and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the appeal.
Let this case be listed for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
JUDGE
Khatai
