AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
13 paragraphs · 234 wordsHeard on I.A. No. 01/2018, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
By the impugned judgment dated 01.06.2018, passed by the Sessions Judge Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon, in S. T. No. 29/2016, the appellant
stands convicted under Sections 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 200/, in default of payment to undergo
three months Additional R. I.
Counsel for the appellant submits that there is no eyewitness account to the incident and the appellant has been convicted solely on the basis of
circumstantial evidence i.e. last seen, which is a very weak type of evidence.
On the other hand, State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that only after arrival of appellant to the house of deceased, Manu Ram
(PW-1) & Smt. Rukhmani Bai (PW-5) have heard the cries of deceased and thereafter the deceased was found dead. He further submits that the
evidence of last seen is conclusive in nature and even the clothes & weapon of offence seized at the instance of accused/appellant have been found
stained with blood. In these circumstances, the appellant is not entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of bail We have heard the parties and
perused the records.
Considering the evidence available on records, at this stage, we are not inclined to release the appellant on bail.
Accordingly, the application (I.A.No. 01/2018) is rejected.