Chattisgarh High Court
Manish Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2025
1/5
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1661 of 2024
Manish Yadav S/o Ashok Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Maneri,
Police Station Dongargaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
... Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Pinkapar, Police Station
Devari, District Balod Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
Order Sheet
27/02/2025 Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Hariom Rai, Penal Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Vide order dated 24.09.2024, a notice was issued to the
father of the complainant/prosecutrix (PW-4), but no one appears
on her behalf to contest the application for suspension of
sentence or grant of bail or the appeal.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence
Digitally
signed by
VEDPRAKASH
DEWANGAN
dated 12.07.2024, passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 41 of
2023, by learned Special Judge (Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Balod, District Balod (C.G.), the
appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentence
U/s. 363 of IPC R.I. for 3 years and fine of
Rs.1000/-, in default of payment
of fine further R.I. for one year.
U/s. 366 of IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of
Rs.2000/-, in default of payment
of fine further R.I. for one year.
U/s. 6 of POCSO Act R.I. for 20 years and fine of
Rs.2000/-, in default of payment
of fine further R.I. for one
month.
(All sentences are directed to run concurrently)
Heard on I.A. No. 1 of 2024, which is an application under
Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
offence. The victim, being a major girl, having love affair with the
appellant and has eloped with him on her own will and had gone
to Hyderabad. She stayed with the appellant there for a
considerable period and has not raised any objection while going
up to Hyderabad, as also staying along with him there. She,
being the consenting party, has made physical relation with the
appellant on her own will without any protest and therefore no
offence against the appellant as alleged are made out. He
submits that no external or internal injuries were found on the
body of the victim during the MLC examination. There is no
legally admissible evidence with respect to age and date of birth
of the victim. The school register has not been proved by the
prosecution in accordance with law. The appellant is in jail since
27.03.2023 and final adjudication of the case will take its own
time. Therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes
and submits that the minor victim was kidnapped by the
appellant and kept her away from her lawful guardianship and
has made physical relation with her against her will and consent.
Her age is proved by the school register, which has been proved
by PW-3/Head Master of the school. Further, from the High
School Certificate Examination Mark-sheet of the victim and Birth
Certificate, her age is proved and same is legally admissible
document. He further submits that though the MLC report is
found negative, but the FSL report is positive, therefore, the
appellant is not entitled for grant of bail.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, considering the evidence available on
record with respect to age of the victim and the school register,
which is sought to be proved by PW-3/Head Master, who is not
the author of the school register. Further, considering the nature
of the allegation against the appellant and that the victim eloped
with the appellant and had gone to Hyderabad and had stayed
with the appellant there without any objection and made physical
relation with him. Further, the appeal will take its own time for
final adjudication and that the appellant is in jail since
27.03.2023, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail.
Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence imposed upon
the appellant- Manish Yadav by the learned trial Court is hereby
suspended. He shall be released on bail on his executing
personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like sum to
the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance
before the Registry of this Court on 27.03.2025. 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 6 months, till final
disposal of this appeal.
Consequently, I.A. No. 1 of 2024 filed by appellant 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.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
ved
