High CourtsDivision Bench(2009) 05 CHH CK 0021

Kutumbhdas vs State of C.G.

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 12 May 2009 · Citation: (2009) 3 CGLJ 208

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pritinker Diwaker, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 263 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 390 words

Pritinker Diwaker, J.—Heard on I.A. No. 1, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

2.

The Appellant has been convicted under Sections 376(1) and 506(B) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years and pay fine of Rs. 500/-, with default stipulations.

3.

Case of the prosecution is that on 30-12-2007 when the prosecutrix was working in her field, Appellant reached there and committed rape on her. After commission of the offence, husband of the prosecutrix came and then report was lodged on 31-12-2007.

4.

Counsel for the Appellant submits that it is a case of false implication. According to him the prosecutrix made efforts to save herself from being subjected to crime in question but she could not manage to do so. He further submits that the Appellant is working as Kotwar. Earlier on 23-2-2006 a report was lodged by one Shanti Bai who was accompanied by the Appellant to the police station, against the prosecutrix and her relatives for the offence punishable u/s 498A IPC and on account of this the prosecutrix and her husband were annoyed with the Appellant and therefore he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question.

5.

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the application and submits that looking to the gravity of the offence, the Appellant is not entitled for bail.

6.

After hearing counsel for the Appellant counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstancs of the case and that earlier a report was lodged by one Shantibai whom the Appellant had accompanied to the police station to assist her, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case in which substantive sentence imposed on Appellant can be suspended and he can be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application LA. No. 1 is allowed. It is directed that substantive sentence imposed on the accused/Appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on 23-9-2009 and thereafter as and when directed in this behalf by the Court concerned, till the final disposal of the appeal.

7.

Certified copy as per rules.