Chattisgarh High Court
Rajabandhan @ Rajpal vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 April, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Criminal Appeal No. 1527 of 2024
1 - Rajabandhan @ Rajpal S/o Ramlal Bandhan, Aged About 30 Years R/o
Bapunagar, Police Staiton-Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.)
... Appellant(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station,
City Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ---- Respondent
09.04.2025 Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video
conferencing.
Heard Mr. Ashish Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and
Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for
the State/respondent on the instant application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail (IA No. 1 of 2024).
By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 19.07.2024, Learned Additional Sessions Judge
F.T.S.C. (POCSO) District Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case
under POCSO Act No. 02/2023, has convicted and sentenced the
Appellant as under:-
Conviction Sentence
u/s 06 of Protection of Children from R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.
Sexual offences Act, 2012 in light of 3000/- in default of which additional
Section 42 of POCSO Act R.I. for four months
u/s 4(2) of Protection of Children R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in 3000/- in default of which additional
light of Section 42 of POCSO Act R.I. for four months
Learned counsel for the convict/appellant has argued that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is
no evidence on record to connect the appellant with commission of the
offence. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that
the victim as per the prosecution case and according to ossification test
report, the age of the victim is between 16 to 18 years at the time of
incident, therefore if two years age difference is applied as per the
medical Jurisprudence, then it can be easily assessed that the
prosecutrix was major lady on the date of incident and also the
evidence of the parents of the victim goes to show that the victim was
not minor at the time of incident. He further argued that though the
appellant happens to be the brother in law of the victim but it appears
that she was consenting party from her statement recorded before the
trial Court. He further argued that no injury was found over the body of
the victim as per the report given by the Dr. Sushma Ekka (PW-2), who
examine the victim and FSL report also found negative. He also submits
that the statements of victim (PW-1) is full of omission and
contradictions. He further submits that the appellant has no criminal
antecedent and the appellant is in jail since 04.11.2022 and further, the
appeal is likely to take a couple of years or even more in its final
disposal, hence he prays that the appellant be enlarged on bail.
Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned G.A. submits that notice has been
served to the mother (PW-3) of the victim, but none appears to oppose
the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant. It is further submitted by the learned State counsel that the
victim is minor girl aged about 14 years at the time of incident,
therefore, he opposes the prayer for grant of bail. He further submits
that the findings arrived at by the learned trial Court is just and proper.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents appended with the bail application.
Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for
the parties, also considering the evidence available on record and the
fact that from the statement recorded before the trial Court, it appears
that she was consenting party and the radiological report goes to show
that she is aged between 16 to 18 years at the time of incident and no
documentary evidence regarding the age of victim has been filed and
no injury was found over the body of the victim and FSL report of the
victim is negative and the appellant is in jail since 04.11.2022 and
further hearing of this appeal would take prolonged period of time, we
deem it appropriate to allow the application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail moved on behalf of the appellant.
Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence awarded to appellant -
Rajabandhan @ Rajpal by the learned trial Court is hereby
suspended. He shall be released on bail on his executing bail bond with
two sureties to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 09.05.2025. He shall
thereafter, 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 06 months, till final disposal of this appeal.
Consequently, I.A. No. 1 of 2024 is allowed.
It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only
confined for disposal of aforesaid I.A. filed 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 final hearing.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Jyoti
