Ravi @ Mahesh Yadav @ Bahta vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1494 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Ravi @ Mahesh Yadav @ Bahta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 January, 2025

                                         1




               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                   Order Sheet

                                 CRA No. 1000 of 2024

 1. Ravi @ Mahesh Yadav @ Bahta S/o Late Jogilal Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o
    Village Near Paltu Kirana Stores Galo No. 4, Shitlapara, Ramnagar, No. 4,
    Shitlapara, Ramnagar, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.)


 2. Sourabh Shrivastava S/o Late Dinesh Shrivastava Aged About 20 Years R/o Nehru
    Chowk Ramnagar, Police Station Gudhiyari, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

                                                                       ---- Appellants

                                      Versus

   State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gudhiyari,
   District Raipur (C.G.)

                                                                       ---- Respondent

28/01/2025 Heard Mr. C.R. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants and

Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/

respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.02/2024, application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail to the appellant No.2-Sourabh

Shrivastava.

This is second bail application. First bail application was

dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 15.06.2024.

Admit.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence

dated 19.04.2024, learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur

District Raipur (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 187/2023, has convicted

and sentenced the appellant as under:-

Conviction Sentence

Under Section 307 read with R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. Section 34 of Indian Penal 1000/- in default of which Code additional R.I. for 3 months.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that the

appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case and

there is no evidence on record to connect the appellant with

commission of the offence. He has further argued that the

appellant has wrongly been found the guilty for the offence

punishable under Section 307 of I.P.C. and he is in jail since

07.04.2024 and the appeal is likely to take some time for its

conclusion, hence the appellant has filed the instant application for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

An objection has been filed on behalf of the

State/respondent. It is argued that the accused-appellant

assaulted complainant with the help of sharp article in his chest in

right side and back side, waist in right side thereby injuring him

with blood. He was bleeding from the wound there is ample

evidence on record to connect the appellant with commission of

the offence. The findings arrived at by the learned trial Court is just

and proper.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

records of the Court below.

Considering the material available on record and particularly

the fact that I.A. No.02/2024 is the second bail application. First

bail application was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order

dated 15.06.2024 and there is no new ground to allow the present

application (I.A. No.02/2024).

This Court finds that it would be appropriate to reject the

application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, at this

stage.

Accordingly, I.A. No.02/2024 stands rejected.

List this appeal for final hearing after three weeks before the

appropriate Bench.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

Vasant