Chattisgarh High Court
Akil Chand Dewangan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 May, 2025
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1759 of 2024
1 - Akil Chand Dewangan S/o Sohan, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village
Govindpur Schoolpara, Police Station Khadganwa, Distt. Manendragarh-
Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G.
... Appellant
versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Khadganwa, Distt.
Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G.
... Respondent
07-05-2025 Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, Panel Lawyer for the
State/respondent.
Heard on I.A. No.01/2024, which is an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted and sentenced by the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21-08-2024
passed in Special Criminal Case No.53/2023 by the learned
Special Judge (POCSO) Chirmiri, District Korea (C.G.) in the
following manner with a direction to run all the jail sentences
concurrently :-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 363 of the IPC R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in
default of payment of fine further R.I. for 7
days,
U/s 366 of the IPC R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.200/-, in
default of payment of fine further R.I. for
15 days,
U/s 4(1) of POCSO R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in
Act default of payment of fine further R.I. for 1
month
The appellant has also been convicted under Section 376 of
the IPC by the impugned judgment. Since he has been awarded
R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine
further R.I. for 1 month for his conviction under Section 4(1) of
POCSO Act, no separate sentence has been awarded to him for
his conviction under Section 376 of the IPC.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is
no legally admissible evidence with respect to the age of the victim
and the school register has not been proved in accordance with
law as the Head Master, PW-5 has admitted that he is not the
author of the school register. As per evidence of father of the
victim, PW-3, the victim is major on the date of incident. As per
evidence of the victim PW-2 herself, she was having love affair
and no forceful sexual intercourse has been committed by the
appellant with her. Looking to her evidence and age, no offence
prima facie appears to be made out against the appellant. The
appellant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused the
liberty. Presently he is in jail since 21-08-2024 and the appeal is of
year 2024 which will take its own time for final adjudication.
Therefore, the appellant may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed
the application.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties and nature of allegation, considering the evidence with
respect to the age of the victim as well as her evidence, I am
inclined to release the appellant on bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2024, application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail is allowed.
It is directed that the substantive jail sentence imposed
upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of
this appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in like
sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before
the Registry of this Court on 04-07-2025. He shall thereafter
appear before the 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, till
disposal of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)
Judge
Aadil
