Nogendra Alias Nogu Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1994 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Nogendra Alias Nogu Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 February, 2025

                                           1




                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               Order Sheet
                        Cr. A. No. 998 of 2024

      Nogendra Alias Nogu Sahu versus State of Chhattisgarh




18/02/2025

Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate for the appellant.

Ms. Prabha Sharma, PL for the State.

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

grant of bail to appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 18.04.2024, appellant stands

convicted as under:-

                       Conviction                            Sentence

                 U/s 307/34 of IPC             : Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years
                                                 & fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of
                                                 payment of fine, 06        months
                                                 additional RI.

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. Prosecution has failed to prove the

ingredients of Section 307/34 of IPC. Eye-witness of the incident has

not supported the case of prosecution. He further submits that

material/evidence available is not sufficient to convict the appellant in

the alleged crime/offence. Further, there are many contradictions and

omissions in the statements of prosecution witnesses. Appeal may

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

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

he be enlarged on bail.

Learned State Counsel opposing the submission of counsel for

the appellant, would submit that as per evidence available on record,

appellant is not entitled for grant of bail. She also pointed out that

there are two previous criminal antecedent against the appellant.

Heard counsel for the parties.

Considering facts of the case, nature of offence, submissions of

counsel for the parties, statements of prosecution witnesses, injuries

sustained by the victim in the alleged incident, I am not inclined to

suspend the sentence and release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No.1 is hereby rejected.

List this case for final hearing.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

J/-