Chattisgarh High Court
Reeta Devi Kashyap vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 August, 2025
-1-
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1587 of 2025
Reeta Devi Kashyap W/o Keshav Kashyap, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village
Khairtal, Police Station Navagarh, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
... Appellant (s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station
Navagarh, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
26/08/2025 Mr. Vivek Singhal, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer for the State.
Pursuant to notice issued, complainant/victim is present
before this Court in person.
Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Also heard on IA No.1 which is an application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
Digitally
signed by Appellant has been convicted under Sections 115 (2), 351
PRAVEEN
KUMAR
SINHA (2) of BNS and Section 3 (2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and
Date:
2025.08.28
10:43:43 Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short
+0530
"Act fo 1989") and sentenced to undergo maximum jail sentence of
1 year vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
23.07.2025 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 46 of 2024 by
learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Janjgir, District Janjgir-
Champa.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has
been awarded maximum sentence of one year for offence
punishable under Section 351 (2) of BNS and Section 3 (2) (va) of
the Act of 1989. He contended that appellant was posted in
FLCRP. Complaint was also posted in PRP. In the meeting, along
with complainant and appellant, about 55-56 women were present.
Some dispute arose on deduction of part of salary of complainant
which converted into quarrel between the two. Both persons
lodged FIR against each other and in criminal case lodged by
appellant, due to settlement between parties, it was closed.
Appellant is a lady. Looking to short sentence, benefit under
Section 430 (3) of the BNSS was extended to appellant and
substantive jail sentence was suspended till filing of appeal and
hearing of application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant was on bail during trial and has not misused the liberty
grant to her.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed
the submission of learned counsel for the appellant.
Complaint/victim who is present in the Court in person raises
objection on suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant.
On due consideration of submission of learned counsel for
appellant based on maximum jail sentence and further that
appellant was on bail during trial, hearing of appeal may take some
time for its final disposal, I consider it to be an appropriate case to
suspend the substantive jail sentence imposed on the appellant.
Accordingly, IA No.1 is allowed. It is directed that the
substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain
suspended during pendency of the appeal and she shall be
released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/-
with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court, for her appearance before the Registry of
this Court on 27th October 2025. Thereafter, she shall appear
before the concerned trial Court on the date given by the Registry
of this Court and continue to appear there till final disposal of this
appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/--/-/---/-/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Praveen
