Mohd. Ayub vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2966 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Mohd. Ayub vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 June, 2025

                                                              1




                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                                                  CRA No. 498 of 2023
                        Mohd. Ayub S/o Late Haneef Aged About 47 Years R/o New Minus
                        Quarter, Chhoti Bazar, Police Station Chirmiri, District : Korea
                        (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh
                                                                                  ... Appellant
                                                          versus
                        State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Chirmiri, District : Korea
                        (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh
                                                                               ... Respondent

Order Sheet

11/06/2025 Heard Mr. Anuroop Panda, learned counsel for the Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS SHRIVAS Date:

appellant. Also heard Ms. Ankita Shukla, learned Panel 2025.06.12 11:01:29 +0530

Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State on the

instant application for suspension of sentence and grant

of bail (I.A. No. 1 of 2023).

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order

of sentence dated 27.01.2023, the learned First

Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, Dist. Korea

(C.G.) in Session Case No. 39/2022, has convicted and

sentenced the appellant in the following manner:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 307 of the Rigorous imprisonment (for Indian Penal Code (for short, 'R.I.') for 05 years short, 'IPC') with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine further RI for 01 month.

Learned counsel for the convict/appellant argued

that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the

present case. He submits that according to the

prosecution, there was only one independent eye-

witness, namely, Ashok Kumar who was present at the

place of occurrence and had seen the entire incident,

however, the prosecution did not examine this witness.

Examination of this independent witness was essential

for the reason that, the victim (PW-6), victim's father

(PW-1), neighbour (PW-2), even the I.O. (PW-9) all have

deposed different versions, but the learned trial Court

has totally overlooked it. He also submits that the

appellant is languishing in jail since 13.03.2022, further,

the appeal is likely to take a couple of years or even

more in its final disposal, hence he prays that the

appellant be enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

matters of Atul Alias Ashutosh vs. State of Madhya

Pradesh (2024) 3 SCC 663 and Nanhe Lal Verma vs.

State of Madhya Pradesh (Arising out of SLP

(Criminal) No. 14769 of 2024) decided on 25.11.2024

wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that when

there is a fixed term sentence and especially when the

appeal is not likely to be heard before completing entire

period of sentence, normally suspension of sentence and

bail should be granted.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes

the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits

that the judgment of the learned trial Court is just and

proper. The prosecution has proved its case beyond

doubts by way of evidence. It is also submitted that, the

accused has been tried and convicted strictly in

accordance with law and his release on bail would defeat

the interest of justice.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the documents appended with the bail

application.

Considering the submissions advanced by the

learned counsel for the parties, further considering the

law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Atul Alia

Ashutosh (Supra) and Nanhe Lal Verma (Supra),

also considering the fact that according to the

prosecution, there was only one independent eye-

witness, namely, Ashok Kumar who was present at the

place of occurrence and had seen the entire incident,

further, the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail

since 13.03.2022 and further hearing of this appeal

would take prolonged period of time, I deem it

appropriate to allow the application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the

appellant.

Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence awarded

to appellant - Mohd. Ayub, by the learned trial Court is

hereby suspended. He shall be released on bail on his

executing bail bond to the satisfaction of the concerned

trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this

Court on 22.07.2025. 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.

Consequently, I.A. No. 1 of 2023 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.

C.C. as per rules.

Sd/-

(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice

Abhishek