Deepak Kerketta vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 4261 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Deepak Kerketta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 September, 2025

                                                            1




                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                                 CRA No. 193 of 2025

                      Deepak Kerketta S/o Admon Kerketta Aged About 32 Years R/o Dipka
                      Colony, District Korba Chhattisgarh
                                                                                      ... Appellant
                                                         versus
                      State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Dipka, Distt. Korba - Chhattisgarh
                                                                                 ... Respondent

Order on Board

04/09/2025 Mr. Vikash Pandey, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy.G.A. for Resp-State. Heard on I.A. No.01/2025, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.01.2025, passed in Sessions Trial No. 24/2023 by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, District Katghora in the following BALRAM PRASAD manner :-

DEWANGAN

U/s. 323 of I.P.C. : Fine of Rs.1,000/- failing which,

undergo R.I. for 3 months U/s. 341 of I.P.C. : Fine of Rs.500/- failing which, undergo R.I. for 1 month

U/s. 307 of I.P.C. : R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- failing which, further undergo R.I. for 5 months U/s. 506 Part-II of : R.I. for 1 year I.P.C.

U/s. 25 of Arms Act : R.I. for 9 months

U/s. 27 of Arms Act R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/- failing which, further undergo R.I. for 1 month Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecution has failed to prove the fire made by appellant from his country made pistol. He also contended that Ajit Yadav (P.W.-1) has stated in evidence that he has not seen seizure of fired cartridge. Injuries suffered by victim is of simple in nature. Appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. He is in jail since the date of judgment. The appeal may take sometime for its final hearing and appellant is having prima-facie good case in his favour, hence, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail may be allowed and appellant may be released on bail.

Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant. She submits that appellant initially assaulted injured by means of stone and thereafter had open fire upon injured but some how, injured saved himself. Thereafter appellant had chased injured, however, in between, police came there and stopped appellant and seized country made pistol from his possession. She submits that cover of fired cartridge was seized from front of

house of Rahul Jaiswal (P.W.-5), who is also seizure witness and proved seizure of cover of fired cartridge.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for respective parties, nature of allegation and the evidence available on record, I am not inclined to suspend the substantive jail sentence and release the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A. 01/2025 is rejected.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE

Balram