Chattisgarh High Court
Milap Giri Goswami vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 September, 2025
Digitally signed
by ALOK
SHARMA
ALOK Date:
SHARMA 2025.09.16
10:37:28
+0530 1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1522 of 2025
1 - Milap Giri Goswami S/o Vedgiri Goswami Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No
14, Bhathapara Village Baroundabazar Police Station And District- Mahasamund
(C.G.)
2 - Lokesh Giri Goswami S/o Vedgiri Goswami Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward
No 14, Bhathapara Village Baroundabazar Police Station And District-
Mahasamund (C.G.)
3 - Omrita Goswami W/o Vedgiri Goswami Aged About 50 Years R/o Ward No
14, Bhathapara Village Baroundabazar Police Station And District- Mahasamund
(C.G.)
... Appellant(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate Mahasamund (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
Order Sheet
15/09/2025
Mr. Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Priya Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for
the Respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, which is an application under
Section 430 of BNSS for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
This appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the
impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 21.07.2025
passed in Sessions Case No. H-15/2024 by the learned 2 nd
Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamound District-
Mahasamound (C.G.), whereby the applicants have been
convicted and sentenced in the following manner :-
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 304 Part-2 of S.I. for 03 years & fine amount
IPC of Rs. 500/- and in default of
payment of fine amount
additional S.I. for 01 month to
all appellants.
Under Section 323 of IPC Fine amount of Rs. 1,000/- and
in default of payment of fine
amount additional S.I. for 01
month to the appellant No.1.
Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the
appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 304
Part- 2 of IPC and sentence for S.I. for 03 years. The appellants
are in jail since 11.12.2023 and thereby they have already
undergone about 01 year 09 month of their jail sentence. The
allegations against the appellants are that they assaulted the
deceased Smt. Sushila Yadav by hand and fist and due to and
internal injury from intestine she died. He would further submits
that the offence does not travel beyond the scope of Section 323
of IPC. However, the learned trial Court has convicted the
appellants for the offence under Section 304 Part-2 of IPC. The
appeal is of the year 2025 and final adjudication of the appeal will
take its own time. He would also submits that looking to the
sentence awarded to the appellant and their incarceration period,
they may be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the
Respondent/State opposes.
Considering the rival submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, considering the total period of sentence
awarded to the appellants as well as their incarceration period,
further the evidence available on record with respect to the
injuries on the body of the deceased Smt. Sushila Yadav, I am
inclined to release the appellants on bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025, is allowed.
It is directed that the jail sentence imposed upon the
appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this
appeal and they shall be released on bail on their furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in
the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for
their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 28.10.2025
and thereafter appear before the concerned trial Court on a date
to be fixed by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to
appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to them
by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)
Judge
Alok
