Chattisgarh High Court
Chandrakumar Lahre vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 January, 2025
1/6
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
I.A. No. 2 of 2024
In Re:
CRA No. 1358 of 2024
1. Chandrakumar Lahre, S/o Shri Panchram, Aged- 30 Years, R/o
Asaunda, P.S. Sakti, District Sakti (C.G).
2. Tulsiram Khande S/o Kamalsai Khande, Aged-37 Years,
3. Girijabai Khande W/o Tulsi Khande, Aged- 33 Years,
No. 2 & 3 are resident of Village Mahka, P.S- Kharsiya, District
Raigarh (C.G)
----Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Station House Officer, P.S.- Nagarda,
District Sakti (C.G.)
---- Respondent
Order Sheet
06/01/2025 Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/
Digitally
signed by
State.
VEDPRAKASH
DEWANGAN
Vide order dated 24.09.2024, the notice was issued to the
complainant/prosecutrix (PW-1) and as per the submissions
made by learned counsel for the respondent/State, the notice
issued to the complainant/prosecutrix has been served upon her.
Despite that no one appears on her behalf to record her
submissions.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence
dated 11.06.2024, passed in Special Criminal Case No. 38 of
2023, by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge
(FTSC), Sakti, District. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), the appellants
have been convicted and sentenced as under:
Accused Chandrakumar Lahre:-
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 363 of IPC R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-,
in default of payment of fine further
R.I. for 02 months.
Under Section 366 of IPC R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.
2000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 03 months.
Under Section 376(3) of IPC R.I. for 25 years and fine of Rs.
50,000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 06 months.
Under Section 6 of POCSO Act, R.I. for 25 years and fine of Rs.
2012 50,000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 06 months.
(All sentences are directed to run concurrently)
Accused Tulsiram Khande:-
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 363, 34 of IPC R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-,
in default of payment of fine further
R.I. for 02 months.
Under Section 366, 34 of IPC R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.
2000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 03 months.
Under Section 6 read with Section R.I. for 25 years and fine of Rs.
17 of POCSO Act, 2012 50,000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 06 months.
(All sentences are directed to run concurrently)
Accused Girijabai Khande:-
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 6 read with Section R.I. for 25 years and fine of Rs.
17 of POCSO Act, 2012 50,000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 06 months.
Heard on I.A. No. 2 of 2024, which is an application under
Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellants
that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt. The allegation of commission of rape is only
against the appellant No.1- Chandrakumar Lahre. The appellant
No.2- Tulsiram Khande is the brother-in-law of the appellant No.1
and the appellant No. 3 is the sister of appellant No. 1. The
allegation against the appellants No. 2 and 3 are that they are
facilitating the appellant No. 1 in the offence in question. It is also
argued that the prosecution has shown the victim as minor,
whereas there is no legally admissible document with respect to
her age that she was minor. The school record produced by the
prosecution has not been proved in accordance with law and the
prosecution has not brought on record any legally admissible
evidence to prove her age.
He would further argue that the conduct of the victim itself
is suspicious as she herself had gone with the appellant No. 1
and engaged in making consensual physical relation with him
without raising any objection. There is no injuries found on the
body of the victim. The appellant No.1- Chandrakumar Lahre and
appellant No.2-Tulsiram Khande are in jail since 29.07.2023,
whereas the appellant No. 3- Girijabai Khande is in jail since
25.09.2023. The final adjudication of the appeal will take its own
time. Therefore, the appellants may be released on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the
prayer for grant of bail and submits that from the school record,
the victim appears to be 14 years of age and was minor, which
has been proved by the Assistant Teacher (PW-12). He would
further submit that the DNA report of vaginal swab of the victim
and blood sample of the appellant No.1- Chandrakumar Lahre
was found positive and thereby involvement of the appellant
No.1 in the offence in question has been proved. From the
evidence of the victim (PW-3), the involvement of the appellants
No. 2 & 3 in the offence in question has also been proved and
the manner in which the victim was being kidnapped and
subjected to rape by the appellant No. 1, the appellants are not
entitled for bail.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
Having considered the rival submissions of the learned
counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations and
material collected during the investigation, the evidence with
respect to age of the victim, no injuries found on the body of the
victim and also considering her conduct in between the period of
17.06.2023 i.e. the date when she was being kidnapped by the
appellants and 29.07.2023, which is the date on which she has
been recovered. Further, that the statement of the victim (PW-3),
we are inclined to release the appellants on bail.
Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence, including fine
amount, awarded to appellants- Chandrakumar Lahre,
Tulsiram Khande and Girijabai Khande by the learned trial
Court is hereby suspended. They shall be released on bail on
their executing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of
the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for
their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 11.02.2025.
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.
Consequently, I.A. No. 2 of 2024 filed by appellants 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.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
ved
