Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 13 (CHH)

P. VANKAT RAO v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2003-02-05

K.H.N.KURANGA

body2003
K. H. N. KURANGA, CJ. ( 1 ) HEARD on the application (l. A. No. 222 of 2003 ). It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the other accused has filed an appeal namely Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 2003 and certified copy of the judgment of the trial Court has been produced in that appeal. Hence, the application (l. A. No. 222 of 2003) is allowed and the appellant is exempted from filing the certified copy of the judgment of the trial court in this appeal. Heard both the counsel on the question of admission of this appeal. The appeal is admitted for consideration. ( 2 ) ALSO heard on the application (M. (Cr1.) P. No. 217 of 2003) for suspension of substantive sentence imposed on appellant - P. Vankat Rao and releasing him on bail as also on the application (Cr1.) P. No. 219 of 2003) for stay of the recovery of fine amount imposed on the appellant. ( 3 ) THE appellant has been convicted for the commission of the offences under Section 148 of I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs. 500. 00 in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months, convicted under Section 307 read with Section 149 of I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs. 5,000. 00 in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, convicted under Section 324 read with Section 149 of I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs. 500. 00 in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for two months, and also convicted under Section 395, read with Section 397 of I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs. 5,000. 00 in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He has challenged the same in this appeal. ( 4 ) IT is stated in the application that the appellant was on bail during the trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him which is not disputed by the learned counsel for the State/respondent. Counsel submits that this appeal may take sometime for its disposal. He has challenged the same in this appeal. ( 4 ) IT is stated in the application that the appellant was on bail during the trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him which is not disputed by the learned counsel for the State/respondent. Counsel submits that this appeal may take sometime for its disposal. ( 5 ) HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the sentences imposed on the appellant, I am of the opinion that the applications (M. (Crl.) P. Nos. 217 of 2003 and 219 of 2003) have to be allowed and they are accordingly allowed. Execution of the substantive sentences including that of fine amount imposed on appellant -P. Vankat Rao shall remain suspended and he is directed to be released on bail on his executing a bond in sum of Rs. 5,000. 00 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 5/5/2003. He shall thereafter appear before the trial Court on a date to be fixed by the Registry of this Court and shall thereafter continue to appear before the trial Court on all such other subsequent dates as are given in this behalf by the said Court, till the disposal of this appeal. In view of this order, the application (I. A. No. 221 of 2003) stand disposed of. Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order. I. A. allowed. --- *** --- .