Pratham Kumar @ Pushpendra Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 385 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Pratham Kumar @ Pushpendra Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 July, 2025

                                      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                                           Order Sheet


                                                         CRA No. 2376 of 2023

                         Pratham Kumar @ Pushpendra Nayak S/o Shri Mahendra Nayak Aged About 19 Years
                         R/o Aamapara, Nigam Colony, P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur (C.G.)
                                                                                     ... Appellant

                                                                 versus

                         State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Azad Chowk, District : Raipur,
                         Chhattisgarh                                            ---Respondent

07/07/2025 Heard Mr. Akash Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.

Rishabh Bisen, appearing for the State / respondent on the instant

application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail (IA No. 2/2025 ).

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

09.11.2023, passed by the learned Fourth Additional Session Judge

Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Session Case No. 40/2022, has convicted

and sentenced the appellant as under:-

                                          Conviction under Sections                    Sentence
ASHUTOSH
MISHRA




                                       307 of Indian Penal Code             R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.

                                        500/- in default of which
                                       additional R.I. for one month,

    25(1)(1-[k)([k) of Arms Act        R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.
                                       500/- in default of which
                                       additional R.I. for one month,

    27(1) of Arms Act                  R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.
                                       500/- in default of which
                                       additional R.I. for one month,

                                       All the sentence      shall   run
                                       concurrently.

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 any witness has not witnessed the act

of sprawl-brawl between the parties at 05:00pm at the deeply crowded

public place. He submits 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 06.12.2021 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.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made

by learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that the accused

appellant assaulted the victim Rahul Soni with an knife and caused

injuries at left thigh and buttock due to which he got deeply injured and started bleeding from the wound and knife has been seized from house of

the appellant and human blood was also found in it and 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 the appellant has been convicted under Sections 307 of the IPC for

commission of assaulting the injured with the knife and he caused

grievous injuries on the front part of left thigh and in the anus of the

injured, blood was oozing from the wound and knife has also been seized

from his house and earlier the application for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail was rejected on merits, therefore, there is no change of

circumstances to consider this repeat application.

Accordingly, IA No.2 of 2025 stands rejected.

Let the matter be listed for final hearing in the month of August, 2025.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Ashu