Chattisgarh High Court
Prakash Deewan @ Bade vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 22 February, 2023
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 1230 of 2022
Prakash Deewan @ Bade S/o Ramadhar Deewan Aged About 20 Years R/o
Sargiguda Para Rajpur P.S. Bhanpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kondagaon District Kondagaon
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
22.02.2023 Mr. P. K. Tulsyan, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Himanshu Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State.
The appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years with fine of
Rs.1000/- with default stipulation and under Section 307 IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years with fine of Rs. 1000/- with default
stipulation in Criminal Case No. S.T.43/2019.
The present appellant is in jail since the date of judgment i.e.
26.07.2022.
Heard on I.A. No.1, which is an application for suspension of
sentence and for grant of bail.
Counsel for the appellants submits that from the plain reading
of the statement of the prosecutrix PW-1 itself would clearly reflect that
the two were having a romantic relationship for a very long time and in
between the appellant and victim had travelled to various places
voluntarily and had stayed together without there being any sort of
pressure or threat on the part of the present appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant referring to the statement of
the prosecutrix submitted that the age of the prosecutrix at the
relevant point of time was 19 years and that of the appellant was of 20
years and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
the appellant may be released on bail.
State counsel however opposes the bail application stating that
it is a case where there is conviction is for a period of 7 years and that
appellant has been in custody for a period of around 1 year and
therefore at this juncture he should not be released on bail.
Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on
perusal of record, particularly, taking into account the statement of the
prosecutrix, the age of the victim and age of the present appellant and
the period of custody already undergone, further keeping in view the
appeal is of the year 2022, there is no likelihood of early final hearing
of the appeal, a strong case for allowing I.A. No.1 is made out.
Accordingly I.A. No.1 stands allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that the further 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 two sureties each in like
sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The appellant is
directed to appear before the trial Court on 21.04.2023 or each and
every date given to him by the trial Court till disposal of the appeal.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
JUDGE
Rohit
