Biswajit Hajarika vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 70 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010087582021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/318/2021
                                               in
                                Crl. Appeal No.133 of 2021

            BISWAJIT HAJARIKA
            S/O- LATE BINANDA HAZARIKA, R/O- HABIGAON, P.S. DERGAON, DIST.
            GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REP. BY THE P.P., ASSAM

            2:GAKUL HAZARIKA
             S/O- LATE LAKHI HAZARIKA
             R/O- HABIGAON, P.S. DERGAON
             MISAPARA, DIST. GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM, PIN- 785703

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR J PAYENG

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA 06-01-2022

Heard Mr. J. Payeng, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of State Respondent No.1.

Respondent No.2 has entered appearance through Mr. J. Barman, Page No.# 2/3

learned counsel.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant on the prayer for bail as well as suspension of sentence imposed upon the applicant/appellant.

Vide the judgment and order dated 20.03.2021, passed in Special POCSO Case No.24/2018, the applicant/appellant was convicted and sentenced by the learned Special Judge, Golaghat, to undergo simple imprisonment for 4(four) years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, with a default clause, for committing offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

I have perused the impugned judgment as well as the evidence on record, as available in the LCR. The facts leading to the case is that the applicant/appellant had kissed on the cheek of the victim and grabbed her while she was coming from school on the date of occurrence and, as such, committed an offence punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The victim, at the relevant point of time, was 16 years of age. I have considered the judgment of the learned Court below as well as the evidence recorded including that of the victim girl.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out various inconsistencies in the evidence which would have, according to him, resulted in acquittal of the applicant/appellant, had the benefit thereof been given to the applicant/appellant by the learned Court below.

Whatever it may be, the fact remains that this is a statutory appeal and the period of sentence imposed upon the appellant is four years and he has already spent 10 (ten) months in judicial custody, as submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. The appeal has been filed in the year 2021 and it is unlikely that hearing will take place in the immediate future.

Page No.# 3/3

That being so, considering the nature of the offence for which the applicant/appellant has been convicted and the period he has already undergone in custody, this Court is of the view that custody of the applicant/appellant, during the pendency of the appeal before this Court, is not essential.

Taking into account all these factors, the applicant/appellant is granted bail. He be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Golaghat, on conditions to be imposed by the learned jurisdictional Special Judge.

The sentence imposed upon the applicant/appellant, vide the aforesaid judgment, is kept in abeyance till disposal of the appeal.

The interlocutory application stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant