Abhishek Rao @ Vicky vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1489 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Abhishek Rao @ Vicky vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 January, 2025

                                        1




             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                               CRA No. 188 of 2025

 •   Abhishek Rao @ Vicky, S/o M. Mohan Rao, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
     Ward No.7, College Road, Rajhara, P.S. Rajhara, District Balod,
     Chhattisgarh.
                                                                     ... Appellant
                                     versus
 •   State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Arakshi Kendra Rajhara, District Balod,
     Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ... Respondent

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

Order Sheet

28/01/2025 Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. for the State/respondent. Heard on admission.

Admit.

Call for records of the concerned Special Court. 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.1/2025, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.01.2025 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the learned

Special Sessions Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) Balod, District Balod (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No.38/2021, appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

S.No. Conviction Sentence

01. U/s. 8 read with R.I. for 2 years with fine of Section 20 (B) (II) (B) Rs.10,000/- and in default of of N.D.P.S. Act payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that prosecution has failed to prove that appellant was in possession of the said contraband article (Ganja) even learned Special Judge has also observed in para 43 of the impugned judgment that possession of appellant of said Ganja can be supposed, thus, conviction is based on conjuncture and surmises without any cogent evidence. It is further submitted that maximum jail sentence has been awarded only upto 2 years and appellant was on bail during trial and never misused the same. He further submits that appellant has a good case to get success in appeal. 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.

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.

Taking into consideration the facts of the case, particularly considering the short term sentence imposed upon the appellant and further considering the fact that appellant was on bail during trial, hence, 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.1/2025, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail 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 03.03.2025. 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.

List this matter thereafter.

Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

Digitally signed by DEEPTI NIRALA DEEPTI JHA JHA Date:

NIRALA 2025.01.29 13:25:15 +0530