Allahabad High Court
Khanjan Lal @ Veer Pal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 11 May, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:104286
Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9282 of 2022
Appellant :- Khanjan Lal @ Veer Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Order On The Application For Suspension Of Sentence
Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for applicant appellant in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Ravi Shankar Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant appellant, the leanred A.G.A. for state and Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwari, the leaned counsel representing opposite party 2.
Perused the record.
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Budaun in Special Criminal Case NO. 55 of 2014 (State Vs. Kanjanlal and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 569 of 2014, under Sections 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Ujhani, District Badaun, applicant appellant has preferred aforesaid criminal appeal.
By means of above noted judgment and order applicant appellant had been convicted under Sections 7/8 POCSO Act with 4 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, applicant appellant is to undergo two months additional rigorous imprisonment.
Record shows that applicant appellant was on bail during the pendency of trial. However, he surrendered before court below on 21.11.2022 and was taken into custody to serve out the sentence awarded by means of above noted judgment and order. Accordingly, applicant appellant has filed above mentioned application for suspension of sentence/bail during the pendency of appeal.
Learned counsel for applicant appellant contends that applicant appellant has been convicted under Sections 7/8 POCSO Act. The maximum sentence awarded to the applicant appellant is 4 years. Referring to the custody certificate of the applicant appellant filed today by means of a supplementary affidavit in court, he submits that applicant appellant has already undergone almost one year of incarceration. There are no chances of the appeal being heard in near future on account of heavy pendency of appeals before this court. Even otherwise, applicant appellant is a man of clean antecedents, inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. In case, applicant appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. On the above premise, it is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicant appellant that applicant appellant be enlarged on bail.
Per Contra, the Learned A.G.A. and Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwari, the learned counsel representing first informant have opposed the present application for bail. They submits that applicant is a convicted accused, therefore, he does not deserved any indulgence by this court. Applicant appellant is guilty of dislodging the modesty of the prosecutrix who is a young girl aged about 12 years as per her School Certificate. Offence complained of is not private in nature but a crime against society. Infact, the same falls in the category of moral turpitude. They, therefore, submit that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant appellant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submission urged by the Learned Counsel for applicant appellant with reference to the record at this stage.
Having heard the leaned counsel for applicant appellant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwari, the learned counsel representing first informant and upon perusal of record, evidence, acquisitions made, complicity of accused and coupled with the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to the applicant appellant is four years, as per the custody certificate applicant appellant has already undergone almost one year of incarceration, applicant appellant having clean antecedents in as much as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one, there are no chances of the appeal being heard in near future on account of heavy pendency of Appeals before this court, there being nothing on record to show that the modesty of the prosecutrix was dislodged by committing sexual assault upon her but without making any comment on the merits of appeal, applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant appellant Khanjan Lal @ Veer Pal, convicted and sentence in Special Criminal Case NO. 55 of 2014 (State Vs. Kanjanlal and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 569 of 2014, under Sections 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Ujhani, District Badaun be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned.
However, it is provided that the amount of fine awarded by court below shall be deposited by applicant appellant within a period of one month from today before court below. In case of default, the bail granted to the applicant appellant shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody at once to serve out the sentence.
Order Date :- 11.5.2023
Aiman
