Chattisgarh High Court
Rambali @ Konda vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 April, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 672 of 2023
Rambali @ Konda S/o Rajan Ram Gond Aged About 22 Years R/o
Village Gopalpur, P.S. Rajpur District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj
(C.G.)
... Appellant(s)
Digitally
AKHILESH signed by
KUMAR AKHILESH
DEWANGAN KUMAR
DEWANGAN
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station -
Rajpur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
Order Sheet
01/04/2025 By the impugned judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 02.03.2023, the learned
Additional Session Judge (Fast Tract Special Court),
(POCSO Act), Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-
Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Special Session Trial (POCSO)
Case No.34/2021, has convicted the appellant in the
following manner :-
Conviction Sentences
I Under Section 354 of 1 year of Rigorous
the Indian Penal Code Imprisonment with fine
amount of Rs. 2,000/-, in
default of payment of fine
further undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for 1 month.
II Under Section 8 of the 3 years of Rigorous
Protection Of Children Imprisonment with fine
from Sexual Offences amount of Rs. 2,000/-, in
Act, 2012. default of payment of fine
further undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for 1 month.
(Both sentences are to be run-concurrently)
Heard Mr. Sachin Nidhi, learned counsel for the
appellant. Also heard Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, learned
Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State on
I.A. No.01 of 2023, which is an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Perusal of the order dated 25.04.2023, it
appears that the victim alongwith her father had
appeared through virtual mode from DLSA, Balrampur
and objected the prayer for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
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.
He further submits that as per the prosecution case,
the age of the victim was 16 years at the time of
incident, but no authentic / documentary proof was filed
in order to show that the victim is a minor girl at the
time of incident, it is a case of elopement and not of
taking away, enticing or abduction. He also submits
that the victim was a consenting party and she had
established sexual relationship with the appellant and
no injury was found over the body of the victim. He
relies upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the matter of Tilku Alia Tilak Singh
vs. The State of Uttrakhand (Criminal Appeal No.
183 of 2014) decided on 06.02.2025 wherein, the
Hon'ble Apex Court has followed with approval of the
judgment of S. Vardarajan vs. State of Madras 1964
SCC OnLine SC 36 and has held that when the victim
age is between 16 to 18 years and she has voluntarily
eloped with the appellant showing that she was a
consenting party thereupon, the suspension of
sentence and bail application of the appellant shall be
allowed. Lastly, the appellant has already served out
jail sentence for a period of about 2 months 12 days
and further, the appellant was on bail, as he was
granted default bail by learned trial Court and has
never misused the liberty of bail granted to him, 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, failing which, the appeal would
become infructuous.
Learned counsel for the appellant also relies
upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the matter of Atul Alias Ashutosh vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh (2024) 3 SCC 663 and in the
matter of Nanhe Lal Verma vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 14769
of 2024) decided on 25.11.2024 wherein, the Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that when there is a fixed term
sentence and especially when the appeal is not likely
to be heard before completing entire period of
sentence, normally suspension of sentence and bail
should be granted. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to
the appellant.
Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer
submits that vide order dated 25.04.2023, it is clear
that the victim / prosecutrix along with her father
appeared before the Court and objected the prayer for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant. She further submits that the victim is minor
girl aged about 16 years and the FSL and MLC reports
are found to be positive, therefore, she opposes the
prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
I 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, relying upon the
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
matter of Atul Alia Ashutosh (Supra) and Nanhe
Lal Verma (Supra), also considering the evidence
available on record and the fact that the victim was
aged about 16 years at the time of incident, but no
authentic / documentary proof was filed in order to
show that the victim is a minor girl and eloped with on
her own will and was a consenting party as such
relying upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the matter of Tilku Alia Tilak Singh (supra)
and the fact that appellant has already served out jail
sentence for a period of about 2 months 12 days, the
appellant was on bail during the trial, as he was
granted default bail by the trial Court and never
misused the liberty of bail granted to him by the trial
Court and further hearing of this appeal would take
prolonged period of time and if the benefit of bail is not
granted to the appellant, the present appeal would
become infructuous, as such, this Court deems 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- Rambali @ Konda, 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
11.06.2025. 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. 01 of 2023 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.
C.C. as per rules.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Akhil
