Santosh Vishwakarma vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1416 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Santosh Vishwakarma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 24 January, 2025

                                                       1




                                                                                           NAFR

                           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                           CRA No. 1427 of 2023

                Santosh Vishwakarma S/o Jhaduram Vishwakarma Aged About 22 Years
                R/o Boddidadar, P.S Komakhan, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
                                                                                      ... Appellant
                                                    versus
                State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Komakhan, District :
                Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

                                                                                   ---- Respondent

(Cause title taken from Case Information System) Order Sheet

24/01/2025 Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Learned counsel for the State would submit that the notice issued to the father/complainant of the victim (PW-1) has been served, but no one appears on her behalf to make submissions on I.A. No. 3 of 2023.

Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH By the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence DEWANGAN

dated 25.03.2023, passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO) Mahasamund (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No. H-21/2022, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction Sentence

U/s. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.

10,000/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 06 months.

U/s. 363 of IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.

1000/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for one month.

U/s. 366 of IPC R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs.

2000/-, in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 02 months.

(All sentences are directed to run concurrently)

Heard on I.A. No. 3 of 2023, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the victim is the sister-in-law of the appellant. Though it is stated that she is a minor girl, aged around 12 years 4 months, but there is no authentic proof regarding her age that she is minor. It is further submitted that as per the statement of the victim itself, it goes to show that the family of the victim as well as the family of the appellant were working at the same place. It is also stated that the victim lived with the appellant for about 4 months, but the fact that she has left the house, no missing report was lodged by the father of the victim, it has been lodged subsequently,

thereafter the victim was recovered with the appellant. He submits that the MLC report and FSL report have been found negative. The appellant is in jail since 20.04.2022 and final adjudication of the case will take some more time and considering the period of his detention, he is entitled for bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that the victim is found to be minor, aged about 12 years and 4 months. She was being subjected to rape by the appellant on the pretext of marriage. Though no injuries have been found on her body and MLC and FSL report was found negative, but in every case injuries are not required to appear in the offence of rape. Looking to the allegation against the appellant, he is not entitled for bail.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of the allegation and the evidence available on record, further considering the evidence of the victim, her MLC and FSL report and also the evidence produced by the prosecution with respect to the age of the victim, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant- Santosh Vishwakarma 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 24.02.2025. 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.

Consequently, I.A. No. 3 of 2023 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 in due course.

                    Sd/-                                    Sd/-
          (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)                     (Ramesh Sinha)
                   Judge                                 Chief Justice




ved