Chattisgarh High Court
Suresh Chandra vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 June, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1116 of 2025
1 - Suresh Chandra S/o Shri Panchram Chandra Aged About
42 Years R/o Village Bhatmahul, Police Station Hasoud,
District Sakti (C.G.).
... Appellant
versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Officer In-Charge, Police
Station Hasoud, District Janjgir Champa Now, District Sakti
(C.G.).
... Respondent
30.06.2025 Mr. Ramesh Nayak, counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Prabha Sharma, P.L. for the
State/respondent.
Heard on I.A. No.01/2025, application under
Section 430 of B.N.S.S. for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
By the impugned judgment dated 23.05.2025
passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST, Act), Janjgir,
District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Special Sessions
Case No. 36/2023, whereby the appellant has been
convicted for the offences punishable under Sections
294, 323 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v-a) of the SC & ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced as
under:-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 294 of IPC Fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount additional S.I.
for 1 month.
U/s 323 of IPC Fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount additional S.I.
for 1 month.
U/s 3(2)(v-a) of R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.
SC & ST 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine
(Prevention of amount additional R.I. for 1 month.
Atrocities) Act
(All the sentences were directed to run concurrently).
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is innocent and is falsely implicated in
the case, and there is no material evidence against the
appellant. He also submits that the appellant is already
on bail, and he has already deposited the fine amount
imposed upon him, and only short sentence of 6
months has been awarded to the appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v-a) of SC & ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act out of which the appellant
has already served the jail sentence of 09 days during
trial, and the conclusion of this appeal is likely to take
considerable time. Therefore, the jail sentence of the
appellant may be suspended till the final disposal of
the case.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes
the bail application and submits that the appellant
have 11 criminal antecedents.
The victim appeared through video conferencing
from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant
bail to the appellant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and also considering the fact that a short
sentence of 6 months has been awarded to the
appellant for the aforesaid offence out of which he was
already in custody for about 09 days during trial and
the appellant is already on bail, the fine amount has
already been deposited, and the final disposal of this
appeal is likely to take considerable time, therefore, I
am inclined to allow the application.
Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 01/2025) is
allowed. It is directed that the substantive jail sentence
imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended
till final disposal of this case on his executing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one
surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial
Court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 26th September, 2025. He shall thereafter
appear before the concerned trial Court on a date to be
given by the Registry of this Court and thereafter,
continue to appear before the trial Court on all such
subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court
till disposal of this appeal.
List this in its chronological order.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
H.L. Sahu
