Mayank Soni @ Sonu v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order Sheet CRR No.85 of 2015 Ku.reena Rajput Versus Vijay Gupta And Ors.

CRA/191/2015,CRA/1204/2014 28/02/2020 Shri Samir Singh, counsel for the applicant in CRR No.85/2015 and Shri Ravindra Sharma, counsel for the appellant in CRA No.1204/2014. Shri Chitendra Singh, PL for the State.

CRR No.85/2015 and two connected appeals are arising out of the same judgment of conviction and sentence. While criminal revision is preferred for enhancement of sentence and awarding of compensation to the applicant (prosecutrix) and in the criminal appeals, the accused persons have challenged their conviction for offence under Section 376 (2) (g) of IPC. In CRA No.1204/2014, counsel for the appellant is not appearing despite repeated calls, therefore, we have no other option but to proceed with the hearing of the appeal after appointing counsel from amongst the panel lawyers appointed by the High Court Legal Services Committee.

Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel present in Court, is appointed to argue CRA No.1204/2014 for appellant Mayank Soni @ Sonu. One set of paper book available with the Court is handed over to Shri Soni, Advocate for preparing the matter.

The appeals shall be taken up for hearing in the post lunch session allowing time to learned counsels to prepare the appeal.

The High Court Legal Services Committee shall issue formal order of appointment appointing Shri Rishi Rahul Soni to argue the appeal, as mentioned above. Post Lunch Session All the matters are heard and disposed of by separate order. While we were dictating the judgment, Shri Vipin Singh Advocate appearing for the appellant Mayank Soni @ Sonu appeared and requested us to hear him for sometime. We allow Shri Vipin Singh to argue the matter. In his submission, he would reiterate almost the same grounds of challenge, which have been stated in the earlier part of this judgment.

Sd/- Sd/- (Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge Judge Nirala