[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chhotu @ Dhirendra Banjara vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 February, 2026
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-10104-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 10104 of 2023
(CHHOTU @ DHIRENDRA BANJARA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 19-02-2026
Shri Sharad Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Veer Vikrant Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General for
respondent/State.
Counsel after making submissions for some time, prays for withdrawal
of I.A. No.21000/2025 as it is settled between the counsel that they shall
argue the matter jointly.
Accordingly, I.A. No.21000/2025 for change in counsel is disposed of
as not pressed.
Heard on I.A. No3314/2024, which is first application under Section
430(1) of BNSS/389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail to appellant.
This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of judgment dated
20.06.2023 passed in SC No.18/2020 by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(POA) Act, Mandla whereby appellant stands convicted and sentenced as
under :-
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
in lieu of fine
one month
Rigorous imprisonment
323 IPC - simple
for 1 year
imprisonment
2 CRA-10104-2023
six months
376(2)(N) IPC Imprisonment for life Rs.2,000/- simple
imprisonment
two months
506 Part-2 IPC RI for three years Rs.500/- simple
imprisonment
one month
342 IPC RI for one year - simple
imprisonment
six months
3(2)(V) IPC Imprisonment for life Rs.2,000/- simple
imprisonment
two months
3(1)(W)(i) IPC RI for three years Rs.500/- simple
imprisonment
It is submitted that there are general and omnibus allegation. Lady
doctor (PW/6) Dr. Usha Dhurve has categorically stated that there were no
symptoms of immediate violation of privacy of victim. Prosecution has also
failed to get DNA test conducted when FSL report was positive. It is also
submitted that there is no evidence on record to prove that appellant was not
belonging to SC/ST community so too attract provision of SC/ST (POA) Act.
Victim was a major. She was working as Asha karyakarta. It is also
submitted that there are good chances of success in this appeal. Hence,
prayer is made to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant and to
release him on bail.
Shri Veer Vikrant Singh, learned Public Prosecutor for the State
opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
3 CRA-10104-2023
record, so also looking to the fact that the appeal will take considerable time
for its disposal, without commenting on the merits of the case, we are of the
considered opinion that this is a fit case to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail. I.A.No.3314/2024 is
accordingly allowed.
It is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the
Trial Court on 30.04.2026 and on such other dates as may be fixed by the
trial court, which shall not be more than two times in a year, the execution of
remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon appellant shall remain
suspended and he shall be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.3314/2024 is allowed & disposed of.
List the case for final hearing in Part-B of the cause list as per its turn
and seniority.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN)
JUDGE JUDGE
RS
