Anjil Dadsena vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Heard on I.A. No.1/2021, repeat bail application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.04.2018, passed in S.T. No. 74/2015, by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur (Sarguja) (C.G.) in the following manner with a direction to run all the sentences concurrently :- U/s. 395 of the

Indian : R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, further undergo one year of R.I. separately U/s. 397 of

the Indian : R.I. for 10 years Penal Code U/s. 398 of the Indian : R.I. for 10 years Penal Code U/s. 120-B of the Indian : R.I. for 10 years and fine of

Rs.10,000/- Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, further undergo one year of R.I. separately It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

appellant that the appellant is in jail since 29.03.2015 and thus he has completed more than half of the jail sentence imposed upon him. Relying on the

judgment of Apex Court in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai & Ors. Vs. State of Gujrat, reported in AIR 1999 SC 1859, it is submitted that the appellate

Court should liberally exercise the power for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. The counsel has also relied on the judgment of Supreme Court

in Kashmira Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (1977) 4 SCC 291, in which, the Supreme Court has held that in case of delay in final hearing of

the appeal, the accused may be granted bail. Therefore, it is prayed that this applicant may be released on bail.

State counsel opposes the application and the submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that earlier bail application of this applicant and other

co-accused persons has been rejected on merits, therefore, only for the reason that the applicant has undergone more than half of the sentence in jail,

he is not entitled for grant of bail.

Considered on the submissions.

In the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail, the delay alone can not be made a ground for release of the appellant on bail. Earlier such

application has been decided on merits and rejected by this Court, therefore, it is not a good case on merits. Hence, for this reason, this Court is of the

opinion that it is not a fit case to suspend the sentence and release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2021, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is rejected.