Mithun Urmal vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3266 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Mithun Urmal vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 June, 2025

        Digitally
        signed by
                            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
        SOURABH
SOURABH PATEL
PATEL   Date:
        2025.06.25
        16:56:06
        +0530
                                           CRA No. 799 of 2025


                     1 - Mithun Urmal S/o Gangadhar Urmal, Aged About 26 Years,
                     R/o Narangpur, P.S. - Bhatli, District Bargarh Odisha
                                                                         ... Appellants
                                                  versus


                     1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S -Dongripali, District
                     Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh.
                                                                        ... Respondent

Order Sheet

25/06/2025 Mr. Prahalad Panda, counsel for the appellant.

Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, which is an application under Section 430(2) of B.N.S.S. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment dated 11.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (Pocso Act), Sarangarh, District-Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 05/2020, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned below :

   Conviction                  Sentence
 Under Section RI for        04 years and fine of
 363 of IPC       Rs.500/-,    in   default   of   fine
                  amount, R.I. for 02 months.


 Under Section RI for        05 years and fine of
 366 of IPC       Rs.500/-,    in   default   of   fine
                  amount, R.I. for 02 months.


 Under Section      RI for    10 years and fine of

4(1) of POCSO Rs.1000/-, in default of fine Act, 2012 amount, R.I. for 01 year.

(All the sentences shall run concurrently)

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that the victim was a consenting party and there is a discrepancy regarding her age. Additonally, it is contended that the Appellant was in jail since 28.05.2022 and subsequently since 11.11.2024 from the date of the judgment and disposal of this appeal is likely to take considerable time, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail and supported the impugned judgment.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record, I do not find any good ground to release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 is rejected. List this case for final hearing.

Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

Sourabh P.