Aarif @ Jusab Hussainbhai Shaikh vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 1305 Guj

          R/CR.A/82/2020                                  IA ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO.
                           1 of 2019
              In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 82 of 2020
==========================================================

AARIF @ JUSAB HUSSAINBHAI SHAIKH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance:

HCLS COMMITTEE for the PETITIONER(s) No. MR. AAMIR S PATHAN for the PETITIONER(s) No. MS CM SHAH, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. ==========================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Date : 28/01/2021 IA ORDER

1. The present application has been filed by the applicant­accused seeking suspension of his sentence pending the Appeal being No. 82 of 2020 arising out of the judgment and order dated 10.03.2017 passed by the Special POCSO Court, Una in Special POCSO Case No. 09 of 2016.

2. In the instant case, the applicant­accused has been convicted and sentenced to undergo various punishments for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 3(a) and 4 of the POCSO Act. The maximum punishment imposed on the accused is ten years of imprisonment. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction the applicant has preferred the captioned Appeal and pending the said Appeal, the present application is filed.

3. It is sought to be submitted by the learned Advocate Mr. Pathan appearing for the applicant that there was no medical evidence as regards the commission of the alleged offence and the trial Court has convicted the applicant only on the deposition of the respondent­

R/CR.A/82/2020 IA ORDER

prosecutrix which could not be said to be trustworthy. However the learned APP Ms. Shah has drawn the attention of the Court to the jail remarks, from which it appears that the applicant had remained absconded for a period of 295 days when he was released on parole leave granted by the High Court on 23.05.2017 in Special Criminal Application No. 3769 of 2017. According to the learned APP Ms. Shah, the trial Court in the well considered judgment running into 176 pages has convicted the applicant, and there is a prima facie case made out against the applicant and this Court may not release the applicant on bail.

4. In the instant case, it appears that the age of the victim was hardly 15 years at the time of the alleged incident. It may be noted that the competent Court in its elaborate judgment has convicted the present applicant for the alleged offences and therefore the initial presumption of innocence is no more available to the applicant. Having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the offence for which the applicant is convicted it is not desirable to release the applicant on bail. As rightly submitted by the learned APP Ms. Shah, the applicant having remained absconded for 295 days when released on parole leave, it is required to be presumed that the applicant has no regard for law and therefore also this application deserves to be dismissed.

5. In that view of the matter, the application is dismissed.

(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J) SINDHU NAIR