Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kathula Sivaramakrishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 27 April, 2023
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Main Case No. Crl. Appeal No.242 of 2023
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. DATE ORDER OFFICE
No. NOTE
BSB, J
5. 27.04.2023
I.A.No.1 of 2023
This application has been filed by
the petitioner to suspend the sentence
imposed against him, vide judgment,
dated 27.02.2023, passed in S.C.No.60 of
2018 on the file of the Special Court for
Speedy trial of offences under the
Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), East
Godavari, at Kakinada.
The instant appeal is filed against
the judgment, dated 27.02.2023, passed
in S.C.No.60 of 2018, whereby, the
petitioner was found guilty for the charge
under Section 376(2)(n)(i), 417 IPC and
Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and was
sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of 10 years and
also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default
to suffer simple imprisonment for a period
of 6 months for the offence punishable
under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of the POCSO
Act. Further, the petitioner was sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
-2-
BSB, J
Crl.A.No.242 of 2023
period of 10 years and also pay a fine of
27.04.2023
Rs.1000/- in default to suffer simple
(contn..)
imprisonment for a period of six months
for the offence punishable under Section
376(2)(i) IPC. He was further sentenced
to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a
period of one year and to pay a fine of
Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple
imprisonment for a period of three months
for the offence punishable under Section
417 IPC.
Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner/accused and the learned
Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for
the respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the petitioner and the
de facto complainant are residing at far off
places and moreover, the de facto
complainant was married and is living
separately with her husband and as such,
there is no occasion for the alleged threat
as mentioned in the statement filed along
with the counter. He further submitted
that the petitioner has been on bail
throughout trial and at no point of time, a
complaint is made that he flouted the
conditions of bail. It is further submitted
that the petitioner is now confined in
Central Jail, Rajahmundry.
BSB, J
Crl.A.No.242 of 2023
Learned counsel would also submit
that notice to the victim is not required in
this case, and in support of his
submissions, he placed reliance on the
decision in Re: Ganesh Das and others1.
Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
opposed the petition submitting that the
respondent filed counter and that the
statement of the de facto complainant is
also enclosed to the counter and the same
may also be read as part of the
submissions on behalf of the respondent.
Perused the record.
After considering the submissions
and as hearing and disposal of the appeal
would take considerable time, this Court is
of the view that the sentence imposed
against the petitioner can be suspended
and the petitioner can be enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, the sentence of
imprisonment alone imposed against the
petitioner is suspended pending disposal
of the criminal appeal, and he shall be
enlarged on bail on his executing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with
two sureties for a likesum to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge for
Speedy trial of offences under the
2022 Cri L J 140
BSB, J
Crl.A.No.242 of 2023
Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), East
Godavari, at Kakinada.
________________
B.S.BHANUMATHI, J
Note:- Issue CC by 28.04.2023
(B/o)
RAR
