Chattisgarh High Court
Umashankar @ Pintu Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 January, 2025
1/3
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No.908 of 2024
• Umashankar @ Pintu Jaiswal, S/o Santosh Jaiswal, aged about 23 years,
R/o Gram Pirda, Thana - Malkhroda, District Janjgir-Chmapa (C.G.)
... Appellant
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Police Station Jaijaipur, District
Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
... Respondent
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
Order Sheet
08/01/2025 Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Vivek Sharma, PL for the State/respondent.
Heard.
Admit.
Issue notice to the respondent.
Learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of
State/respondent, therefore, issuance of notice to it, is dispensed
with.
Also heard on I.A. No.1/2024, which is an application for
suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the appellant during
pendency of the appeal.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 02.05.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge
(SC & ST Act), Janjgir-Champa in Special Criminal Case No.
No.35/2021, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as
under :-
S.No. Conviction Sentence
01. U/s. 313 of the IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for
five years with fine of
Rs.2,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount ,
to further undergo RI for
two months.
02. U/s. 306 of IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for
five years with fine of
Rs.2,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount ,
to further undergo RI for
two months.
Both the sentences were
ordered to run
concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant
has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He submits that
appellant was on bail during trial and during pendency of the
appeal and he did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him.
Presently, he is in custody since 02.05.2024, the date of passing of
the impugned judgment. He submits conclusion of the appeal is
likely to take long time and the appellant is ready and willing to
furnish bail bonds and will follow all the conditions imposed upon
him, therefore, therefore, he prays that application for suspension
of sentence of the appellant may be allowed and sentence may be
suspended till the decision of this appeal.
On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the prayer
for grant of bail.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the application
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record carefully.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard
to the facts of the case, particularly, considering the fact that
appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the bail
granted to him and he is in jail since 02.05.2024 i.e. after passing of
the impugned judgment, I feel inclined to allow the application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
In view of above, I.A. No.1/2024, application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant is allowed.
The substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant by
the learned trial Court is hereby suspended. He shall be released
on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-
with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 10.02.2025. 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.
Call for records of the concerned trial Court.
List this matter after receiving of record of the trial Court.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Amit
AMIT by AMIT
KUMAR DUBEY
KUMAR Date:
DUBEY 2025.01.10
18:21:36 +0530
