Yugendra Mishra @ Yogendra Mishra @ ... vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1849 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Yugendra Mishra @ Yogendra Mishra @ ... vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 February, 2025

                                        1




                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                   Order Sheet
                            Cr. A. No. 30 of 2025

   Yugendra Mishra @ Yogendra Mishra @ Chhotu S/o Indresh Kumar
   Mishra Aged About 25 Years R/o Lig 56, Housing Board Colony,
   Chilhati PS Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                           ... Appellant

                                     versus

   State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station
   Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                        ---- Respondent

10.02.2025 Mr. Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Karan Bahrani, PL for the respondent-State.

Heard on I.A. No.1, application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail to the appellant, during pendency of this appeal.

By the impugned judgment Annexure A-1, appellant stands

convicted under Sections 454 & 354(घ)(i) of the IPC, Section 7/8 &

11(i)(iv)/12 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for

02 years with fine of Rs.500/-, RI for 03 years with fine of Rs.500/-

& R.I. for 02 years with fine of Rs.500/- with usual default clauses

respectively.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has

been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any

offence as alleged against him. Trial Court convicted the appellant

without there being any sufficient evidence/material available on

record. There are many contradictions and omissions in the

statements of prosecution witnesses. During trial, appellant was on

bail and he never misused liberty granted to him earlier. Appeal

may take time for final hearing, hence, looking to the detention

period of appellant, sentence awarded to him be suspended and he

may be enlarged on bail.

Learned State Counsel opposing submission of counsel for

appellant, would submit that as per evidence/material available on

record, appellant is not entitled for grant of bail.

Heard counsel for the respective parties, perused statements

of witnesses and other materials available on record.

Victim alongwith her father, is appeared before this Court by

virtual mode through the concerned DLSA. She submits that she is

having objection in granting bail to the appellant.

Considering facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the

respective parties, statement of victim/prosecutrix, other

evidence/material available on record, during trial appellant was on

bail and he never misused the liberty granted to him earlier,

detention period of appellant, appeal may take time for final

hearing, I am inclined to allow the suspension application of

appellant.

Accordingly, I.A. No.1, application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that execution of

substantive jail sentence imposed on appellant shall remain

suspended and he be released on bail on his executing a personal

bond for a sum Rs.10,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the

Registry of this Court on 03.04.2025. He shall thereafter appear

before the Trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this

Court and shall continue to appear there on all such other

subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court, till disposal

of this appeal.

CC as per rules.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

J/-