Vinod vs Versus State Of Kerala

Kerala High Court

Vinod vs Versus State Of Kerala on 3 May, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
            Friday, the 3rd day of May 2024 / 13th Vaisakha, 1946
                CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2024 IN CRL.A NO. 606 OF 2024
             SC 313/2022 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, CHENGANNUR
APPLICANT/APPELLANT:

     VINOD V S, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O P.N VIJAYAKUMAR, GOKULAM
     VEEDU,KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE,KAITHA THEKKUMURIYIL,
     CHETTIKULANAGARA,ALAPUZHA DT, PIN - 690106

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
     KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

     Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to allow this Crl.M.A. and suspend the further
execution of the sentence imposed against the Applicant/Appellant/Accused
in Judgment dated 24/2/2024 in S.C. No.313/2022 passed by the Court of
Fast Track Special Judge, Chengannur till the disposal of the above appeal
in the interest of justice.
     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of SHRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL, Advocate for the
petitioner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent,the court passed
the following:
                     P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
   -----------------------------------------------------------
                     Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2024
                               in
                 Crl.Appeal No. 606 of 2024
   -----------------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 3rd day of May, 2024


                           ORDER

The appellant filed this petition under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code). The petitioner would contend that he is innocent and there is every chance for allowing the appeal and acquitting him. He was on bail during the trial of the case. In such circumstances, he claims that he is entitled to get execution of his sentence suspended.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the petition by contending that the evidence adduced by the prosecution proved beyond doubt that the petitioner had committed the offence alleged against him. The offence proved against the petitioner is grievous. On account of the offence he has committed, the victim girl, who was aged only 9 years at the Crl.M.A. No.1 of 2024 in 2 Crl.A.No.606 of 2024 time of occurrence, has been put to untold miseries. Considering the gravity and nature of the offence and the tenure of the sentence imposed, the petitioner is not entitled to get an order to suspend the sentence.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 342, 354, 354A(2) r/w 354A(1)(i) and 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 8 read with Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The term of sentence the petitioner has to undergo is imprisonment for five years.

5. The charge levelled against the petitioner was that the petitioner at about 9.00 a.m. on 07.12.2021 followed the victim while she was going to a nearby house, gagged her and took her to his house. Inside his house the petitioner had touched and fondled at her breast and abdomen with sexual intent. The trial court, believing the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found the petitioner guilty as Crl.M.A. No.1 of 2024 in 3 Crl.A.No.606 of 2024 mentioned above.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there have been serious discrepancies in the evidence of the victim. Therefore, the conviction is based on unreliable and insufficient evidence, and the appeal will be allowed. Having gone through the judgment and considered the available materials, prima facie, I am unable to agree with the contention that the findings leading to the conviction of the petitioner is wrong.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the victim is even now is afraid of the petitioner. His nature being that he used to abuse women and children granting him liberty will be alarming to the victim. It is also pointed out that his wife left his company owing to his character.

8. The period of sentence imposed is five years. He was convicted and sentenced on 24.02.2024. The contentions raised by the petitioner to assail the impugned judgment require deeper consideration. Considering that and other mitigating circumstances, I am of the view that execution of sentence can be suspended subject to strict conditions, so as Crl.M.A. No.1 of 2024 in 4 Crl.A.No.606 of 2024 to protect the interest of the victim.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail on his executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to the following conditions:

i) He shall deposit entire fine amount in the trial court within one month;

ii) He shall not enter the revenue districts of Alappuzha and Kollam till the final disposal of this appeal;

iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any offence; and

iv) He shall not contact or try to intimidate the victim or witnesses examined in the case.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply before this Court for cancellation of the suspension of sentence.

Sd/-

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE dkr 03-05-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar