Umakanta Singh vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 2803 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010058362023




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

                            Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/212/2023


            UMAKANTA SINGH
            S/O SRI RAM SINGH
             RESIDENT OF KATHALGURI TE
             PS MARIANI
             JORHAT
            ASSAM
            VERSUS
            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
            REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM
            2:SIMA PATNAYAK
            W/O BIRKHO PATNAYAK. RESIDENT OF KATHALGURI TE
             PS MARIANI
             JORHAT
            ASSAM
             ------------
            Advocate for : MR. A U CHOUDHURY
            Advocate for : PP
            ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.



                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
                   HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG

                                      ORDER

02.08.2023 (M. Zothankhuma, J.)

1. Heard Ms. D.R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

Page No.# 2/3

2. This is an application filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C, for suspension of the sentence passed in connection with the impugned judgment dated 23.02.2023 by the Special Judge, Jorhat in Special Case No.29/2019, by which the applicant and one Basanta Patnayak have been convicted under Section 376(3) IPC read with Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act, 2012. The applicant/appellant and the co- accused Basanta Patnayak were then sentenced under Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act, 2012, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 year.

3. The applicant' counsel submits that a perusal of the FIR read with the evidence of PW-1, who is the informant and mother of the victim girl shows that while the incident had occurred on 06.06.2019, the same had been made known to the PW-1 on 08.06.2019. She also submits that the incident having occurred in the afternoon in a crowded place, where the victim girl was carried by Basanta Patnayak to the shop of the applicant, who thereafter inserted a candle into the private parts of the victim girl, is farfetched and not believable. She also submits that the applicant being 63 years of age, the applicant should be released on bail on humanitarian ground due to his old age.

4. Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand submits that the evidence of the victim girl vis-a-vis the statement made under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. shows that there is no contradiction in her statements and as such the application should be rejected.

5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusing the evidence, we are of the view that the sentence should not be suspended at this stage. We are also of the view that in view of the evidence given by the victim girl, bail should not be granted.

Page No.# 3/3

6. The application is accordingly dismissed.

                       JUDGE                     JUDGE



Comparing Assistant