Satpal Banjare vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 359 Chatt

                                                    1



                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                 CRA No. 623 of 2022


         Satpal Banjare S/o Loknath Banjare Aged About 23 Years R/o Village
         Bhaisamuda, Police Station Navagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

                                                                         ---- Appellant
                                           Versus
         State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Navagarh,
         District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.
                                                                      ---- Respondent

Division Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

17.01.2023 Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sourabh Sahu,

Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Avinash Singh, P.L. for the State/respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.01, application for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence

dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act,

2012), Bemetara (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No.35/2020, the

appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376(2)(j) of

IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and

fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, 3 months further

R.I.; and also under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for

20 years and fine of Rs.1000/- in default of payment of fine, further R.I.

for 3 years.

Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, learned senior counsel for the appellant,

submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in

question and he has been convicted by recording a finding, which is

perverse to the record. Appellant is in custody since 02.12.2017,

therefore, application may be allowed and appellant may be released on

bail.

Per contra, Mr. Avinash Singh, learned State counsel, opposes the

prayer raised by learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on

the basis of statement of victim / prosecutrix (PW-1) and FSL Report

(Ex.P/21), the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the present

appellant and, as such, the bail application of the appellant deserves to

be rejected.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival

submissions and also perused the records with utmost circumspection.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,

nature and gravity of offence and considering statement of victim /

prosecutrix (PW-1), who was minor at the time of incident and FSL

Report (Ex.P/21) in which on Articles A & B i.e. underwear and slide of

victim/prosecutrix and Article C i.e. underwear of the accused

respectively, stains of semen and human sperm were found and further

considering the other evidence available on record, we are not inclined to

grant bail to the present appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No. 01 is rejected.

                      Sd/-                                        Sd/-

             (Sanjay K. Agrawal)                      (Radhakishan Agrawal)
                   Judge                                    Judge




Yogesh