Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 97 Chatt
Judgement Date : 21 June, 2024
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 733 of 2024
Parkhu @ Omprakash Sahu S/o Dwarika Prasad Sahu, Aged About 22
YearsR/o Ward No. 21, Pendri, Thana-City Kotwali, District-
Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Thana-City Kotwali, District-
Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
---- Respondent
21.06.2024 Shri Samir Singh, Counsel for the Appellant.
Shri Kishan Sahu, Dy. G.A. for the State/ Respondent.
Heard on admission as well as on I.A. No. 01/2024 an
application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Admit.
On the last date of hearing i.e. 26.04.2024, this Court has
directed to issue notice to victim for their appearance before this
Court either in person or through their Advocate or through virtual
mode. Despite notice, victim has not appeared through any mode.
By virtue of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.03.2024 passed by the learned ASJ (FTSC) POCSO, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) passed in Special Cr. (POCSO) Case No. 29/2020, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentences
Under Section 354 of R.I. for 03 years and fine of Rs. 500/-
IPC. in default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 2 months
Under Section 7/8 of R.I. for 04 years and fine of Rs. 600 in
POCSO Act, 2012 default of payment of fine additional
R.I. for 2 months.
Under Section 11/12 of R.I. for 01 year and fine of Rs. 200/- in POCSO Act, 2012 default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 01 month.
All sentences are running concurrently but default of fine, the sentence was running one by one.
Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the statement of the prosecution witnesses are not in full confidence and looking to the statement of prosecutrix as well as her parents they are falsely implicating the appellant as her version is not supported from the medical evidence of prosecutrix and none of the independent witnesses supported the case of prosecution, so the conviction cannot be sustained only on the basis of the statement of prosecutrix. The appellant was on bail during the trial and is in jail from 09.03.2020 to 17.03.2020 and after conviction 21.03.2024. Since the appeal with take some considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, the jail sentence as awarded by the Trial Court be kept in abeyance, till the disposal of this appeal.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/State has opposed the said application.
Having considered the aforesaid contention of the parties, considering the nature of incident and act committed by the appellant and particularly looking to the detention period. I am, therefore, inclined to allow this application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, without further commenting anything on the merits of this case.
Accordingly, the I.A. No. 01/2024 is allowed and it is directed that 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. 5,000/- with surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 22.08.2024. 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, till final disposal of this appeal.
In view of above, I.A. No. 01/2024 stands disposed of.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd//-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Shoaib Judge
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!