Chattisgarh High Court
Jugal Kishore vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 January, 2023
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 606 of 2021
Jugal Kishore, S/o. Kalluram Sinha, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Saakin Arjkund,
Police Station Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. Presently In
Prison.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Daundilohara, District Balod,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
Division Bench :-
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal
30.01.2023 Dr. Shailesh Ahuja, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State.
Heard on I.A.No.1, application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
The appellant has been convicted by the judgment dated
20.01.2021 passed by the learned Court below in Special
Session Case No.102 of 2018 in the following manner with a
direction to run the sentences concurrently.
Conviction Sentence
U/s. 363 of I.P.C. : R.I. for 7 years with fine of
Rs.4000/- in default of payment of
fine, 5 months additional R.I.
U/s. 376 of I.P.C. and : Life imprisonment with fine of
U/s. 3 / 4 of POCSO
Rs.5000/- in default of payment of
Act, 2012
fine, 6 months additional R.I.
U/s. 3 (2) (v) of SC & : Life imprisonment with fine of
ST (Prevention of Rs.5000/- in default of payment of
Atrocities) Act, 1989. fine, 6 months additional R.I.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
victim (PW-1) was minor on the date of offence as proved by
Article A-C and the Radiologist report (Ex.P-7) in which her age
is held to be 19 years and also in view of the statement of the
victim (PW-1), Agmen Das (PW-2) and Mohan Lal Thakur (PW-
3). Furthermore, the date of offence is 21.09.2018 and FIR has
been lodged on 24.09.2018 and there is delay of 3 days in
lodging the FIR, which has not been explained by the
prosecution. Therefore, in light of the decision of Allahabad
High Court in case of Mukesh Tiwari v. State of U.P. decided
on 04.03.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.1876 of 2009 and also the
decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of Satpal Singh
v. State of Haryana (2010) 8 SCC 714, Thulia Kali v. State
of Tamil Nadu (1972) 3 SCC 393, Meharaj Singh & Ors. v.
State of U.P. & Ors. (1994) 5 SCC 188 and the decision in the
matters of Jogi Dan & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan - 2004
Cri.L.J. 1726 and Aneep Kumar v. State of Himachal
Pradesh Criminal Appeal No.99 of 2010 decided on
11.09.2017, and considering the fact that there was no injury on
the private part of the victim, the appellant deserves to be
released on bail.
Per contra, learned State counsel submits that as per
Dakhil Khariz Register (Ex.P-17) and Mark-sheet (Article A-C)
the victim is minor on the date of offence, as her date of birth is
10.10.2000 and date of offence is 21.09.2018 and as per the
FSL report (Ex.P-25) in slides of the victim and undergarment
of the accused, stain of semen & human sperm was found.
Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail.
The father of the victim (PW-5) has been served notice on
12.01.2023 through the State.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties,
considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went
through the records with utmost circumspection.
Considering the oral and documentary evidence available
on record and further considering the explanation of delay in
lodging the FIR and also considering the FSL report (Ex.P/25) in
which on slides of victim and undergarments of the accused,
stains of semen & human sperm were found and other piece of
evidence on record, we do not consider that it is a fit case to
suspend the sentence and grant bail to the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.1 is rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal)
Judge Judge
Ashok
