Santosh Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2922 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Santosh Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 May, 2025

                                                     1




                                                                            NAFR
                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                        CRR No. 622 of 2025

                    1 - Santosh Kumar Sahu S/o Faguram Sahu Aged About 48
                    Years R/o Village Chamari (Tingipur), Tahsil Mungeli, District
                    Mungeli (C.G.)
                                                                      ... Applicant
                                                versus
                    1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kowali
                    Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.)
                                                                   ... Respondent

27.05.2025 Mr. Pravesh Sahu, counsel for the applicant.

Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. for the State. Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No.01/2025, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By judgment dated 13.02.2024 passed by Chief

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mungeli, District -

Mungeli (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 568/2018, the 15:31:00 +0530

applicant stands convicted under Sections 354 and 509 of IPC, and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2-2 years with fine of Rs. 500-500 respectively. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the applicant preferred an appeal, i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 12/2024, and vide impugned order dated 28.04.2025, the learned Sessions Judge, Mungeli, District - Mungeli (C.G.,) partly allowed the appeal and acquitted the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC. However, conviction of the applicant under Section 354 of IPC has been affirmed, and sentence of 2 years' R.I. has been reduced to 1 year's R.I. with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of the fine amount, additional S.I. for 1 month.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and is falsely implicated in the case, and there is no material evidence against him. There is a material omission and contradiction in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. He also submits that the applicant is in jail for more than one month, the revision will take considerable time, therefore, the application may be allowed and the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that only 1 year R.I.

has been awarded to the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC out of which the applicant has already served the jail sentence for more than one month, the application is allowed and it is directed that the substantive jail sentence imposed upon the applicant shall remain suspended till final disposal of this revision, and he shall be released on bail 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 27th June, 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 petition.

Call for the records of the trial Court. List this case for final hearing in its chronological order.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 02/2025, application for hearing during summer vacation and I.A. No. 03/2025, application for urgent hearing stand disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Vacation Judge H.L. Sahu