Shekh Saddab Ahmad vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2024 Latest Caselaw 649 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Shekh Saddab Ahmad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 June, 2024

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                                     Order Sheet

                                     CRA No. 714 of 2024

  • Shekh Saddab Ahmad S/o Jamil Ahmad Aged About 25 Years R/o Quarter No. 01/c
    Street No. 02, Sector 06, P.S. Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.).

                                                                           ---- Petitioner

                                        Versus

  • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Oicer, Police Station Bhilai Nagar,
    District Durg (C.G.).                                         ---- Respondent

27/06/2024 Heard Mr. Neelam Khan, on behalf of Mr. Pushpendra Kumar

Patel, learned counsel for appellant. Also heard Mr. Tarkeshwar

Nande, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for Respondent-State, on the

instant application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail i.e. I.A.

No. 1 of 2024.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence

dated 23.03.2023, learned Special Judge, S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of

Atrocities Act), Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) in Special Criminal

Case No. 16/2022, has convicted and sentenced the Appellant as

under:-

                         Conviction                             Sentence

             354 of Indian Penal Code              R.I. for 03 years with ine of
                                        Rs.2000/- in default of which
                                       additional S.I. for one month

354 (|) Indian Penal Code              R.I. for 01 year with ine of Rs.
                                       1000/- in default of which
                                       additional S.I. for 15 days.

8 of the Protection of Children From R.I. for 3 years with ine of Rs. Sexual Ofences Act, 2012 2000/- in default of which additional S.I. for one month.

All sentences are to be run- concurrently.

Learned Counsel for Convict/Appellant has argued that the Appellant

has been falsely implicated in the instant case as the allegations levelled

against him by the Prosecution do not support conviction for the ofences

against which he has been convicted. He further submits that the

Prosecution has also failed to prove the involvement of the Appellant in the

crime. He further submits that the Appellant was is in jail 03.09.2022 to

20.04.2023 and the appeal is likely to take some time for its conclusion,

hence the sentence imposed upon the Appellant may be suspended and he

may be granted bail during pendency of this Appeal.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail

application and submits that the accused appellant tried to outrage the

modesty of the prosecutrix. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be

released on bail.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the bail application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the

conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant and the trial is likely to

take sometime for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant

is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence imposed upon the Appellant

by the learned Trial Court is hereby suspended. The Appellant shall be

released on bail on his executing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety

in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his

appearance before the Registry of this Court on 02.09.2024. Thereafter, he

shall appear before the concerned Trial Court on a date to be given by the

Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such

subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court, interval being not

less than 6 months, till inal disposal of this appeal.

Consequently, IA No.1 of 2024 stands allowed.

It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only

conined for disposal of the aforesaid I.A. iled in this Appeal and it shall not

be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the

matter.

              List this matter for inal hearing.                  SD/-

                                                           (Arvind Kumar Verma)
                                                                 Judge
Jyoti