Chattisgarh High Court
Ajay Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 January, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 17 of 2025
1. Ajay Yadav, S/o Manbahal Yadav, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, P.S Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
2. Ramesh Yadav, S/o Late Dhunur Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village
Sulesa, P.S. Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
3. Shivkumar Yadav, S/o Manbahal Yadav, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S. Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
4. Ramkaran Yadav, S/o Vishwanath Yadav, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Village Tendupath, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S. Bagicha, District Jashpur
(C.G.).
5. Subhash Yadav, S/o Shivkumar Yadav, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
6. Guni Yadav, S/o Late Ramdhan Yadav, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
7. Ghuran Yadav, S/o Goli Yadav, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
8. Ramu Yadav, S/o Mohan Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village
Murakona, Chouki Pandrapath, P.S Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
... Appellants
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.).
... Respondent
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
Order Sheet
27/01/2025 Mr. Jai Prakash Shukla, counsel for the appellants.
Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Deputy G.A. for the State/respondent.
Today, the case is listed for orders on default(s).
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Issue notice to the respondent.
Learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of the
State/respondent, therefore, issuance of notice to it, is dispensed
with.
Also heard on I.A. No.1/2024, application under Section 430
(2) of B.N.S.S. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 11.11.2024 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the learned
Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act 1989 Jashpur,
District Jashpur (C.G.) in Special (SC/ST) Case No.10/2019, each
of the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-
S.No. Conviction Sentence
01. U/s. 147 of Indian R.I. for 1 year
Penal Code, 1860
02. U/s. 325 read with R.I. for 1 year with fine of
Section 149 of Indian Rs.500/- and in default of
Penal Code, 1860 payment of fine, S.I. for 5
days.
03. U/s. 506 part-II of R.I. for 6 months
Indian Penal Code,
04. U/s. 324 of Indian R.I. for 6 months
Penal Code, 1860
05. U/s. 3(1)(s) of SC/ST R.I. for 6 months with fine of
Atrocity Act, 1989 Rs.500/- and in default of
payment of fine, S.I. for 5
days.
06. U/s. 3(2)(va) of R.I. for 6 months with fine of
SC/ST Atrocity Act, Rs.500/- and in default of
1989 payment of fine, S.I. for 5
days.
All the sentences are
directed to be run
concurrently.
Appellants namely, Shivkumar Yadav, Ajay Yadav,
Ramkaran Yadav and Ghuran Yadav have also been convicted
and sentenced in the following manner:-
S.No. Conviction Sentence
01. U/s. 365 of Indian R.I. for 2 years with fine of
Penal Code, 1860 Rs.500/- and in default of
payment of fine, S.I. for 5
days.
02. U/s. 367 of Indian R.I. for 3 years with fine of
Penal Code, 1860 Rs.500/- and in default of
payment of fine, S.I. for 5
days.
03. Appellant R.I. for 6 months.
Shivkumar Yadav
has also been
convicted U/s. 324
of Indian Penal
Code, 1860
All the sentences are
directed to be run
concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that
appellants were on bail during trial and never misused the same. It
is further submitted that even after conviction of appellants, jail
sentence has been suspended by the trial Court and maximum jail
sentence has been awarded only upto 3 years. He further submits
that appellants have a good case to get success in appeal.
Therefore, he prays that application for suspension of sentence of
the appellants may be allowed and sentence may be suspended till
the decision of this appeal.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
Victim/complainant appeared along with his father through
video conferencing from DLSA Jashpur (C.G.) and raised strong
objection in respect of I.A. No.1/2024, application under Section 430
(2) of B.N.S.S. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail as well
as on memo of appeal.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record carefully.
Taking into consideration the facts of the case, particularly
considering the short term sentence imposed upon the appellants
and further considering the fact that appellants were on bail during
trial, hence, I feel inclined to allow the application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
In view of above, I.A. No.1/2024, application under Section
430 (2) for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellants is allowed.
The substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellants by
the learned trial Court is hereby suspended. They shall be released
on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/-
with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 28.02.2025. They 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 them by the said Court, interval being not less
than 6 months, till final disposal of this appeal.
List this matter thereafter.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Digitally
signed by
DEEPTI
DEEPTI JHA
JHA NIRALA
NIRALA Date:
2025.01.27
17:13:49
+0530
