Shankar Baghel vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3824 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Shankar Baghel vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 April, 2025

                                                                   1




                                                                                                       NAFR

                                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                                    CRA No. 544 of 2024

                        Shankar Baghel S/o Sitaram Baghel Aged About 23 Years R/o Village
                        Homaras P.S. Kukanar Distt. Sukuma (C.G.)
                                                                                                 ... Appellant
                                                              versus
                        State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kukanar Distt. Sukuma (C.G.)
                                                                                               ... Respondent

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

Order Sheet

21/04/2025 Smt. Indira Tripathi, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Heard on I.A. No. 1 of 2024, which is the application

for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the

appellant.

Digitally The appellant has been convicted and sentenced by signed by VEDPRAKASH VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date:

2025.04.21 18:53:45 +0530

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

27.02.2024, passed in Sessions Trial No. 94 of 2019, by

learned Sessions Judge, South Bastar, District Dantewada

(C.G.), in the following manner:-

         Conviction                             Sentence
 U/s. 148 of IPC                  Rigorous Imprisonment for 01 year

and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 01 month.

U/s. 307 of IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for 07 years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 04 months.

U/s. 450 of IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for 02 months.

All the sentences are directed to be run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that

there are five persons have been prosecuted, out of which

four have been acquitted and the present appellant has

been convicted. The victim has not identified the assailant

and there are material contradictions. There are

inconsistency in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. As

per the injuries found on the body of the injured, the

offence under Section 326 of IPC at the most is made out.

The appellant was on bail during the trial and is in jail since

27.02.2024, the final adjudication of the appeal will take its

own time. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State

opposes and has submitted that from the evidence of the

wife of the injured Sonmati Kashyap (PW-5), the

involvement of the present appellant has been proved. He

inflicted injuries by axe on the head of the injured, while he

was sleeping in his house. From the evidence of Dr.

Thomas Damor (PW-20), he opined that the injuries found

on the body of the injured, is grievous in nature and death

might have been caused by the said injuries. Therefore, the

appellant is not entitled for bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

Considering the submissions made by learned

counsel for the parties, considering the nature of the

allegations against the appellant, further considering that

the named report has been lodged against the present

appellant, he caused injuries on the head of the

injured/PW-6, when he was sleeping in his house. As per

the evidence of doctor (PW-20), the injuries are grievous in

nature and death might have been caused from the

injuries, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail at

this stage.

Accordingly, his application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail (i.e. I.A. No. 1 of 2024) is

rejected.

List this case for final hearing after 08 weeks.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

ved