Ajay Prajapati vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4852 Jhar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1607 of 2017
                                        ......

       Ajay Prajapati                                    --- ---         Appellant
                                       Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                                    --- --- Respondent
                                       ---
       CORAM:          The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
                       The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo
                           Through Video Conferencing

               For the Appellant        : Ms. Renu Bala, Advocate
               For the State            : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
                                        ---
4/15.12.2021         Heard learned counsel for the appellant Ms. Renu Bala and

learned A.P.P. Ms. Vandana Bharti on the renewed prayer for suspension of sentence of this appellant made through I.A. No. 6826/2021.

The sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under sections 4 and 8 of POCSO Act vide impugned judgment dated 31.07.2017 rendered in POCSO Case No. 25/2016 by the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Palamau at Daltonganj and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and a default sentence under section 4 of POCSO Act and R.I. for three years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and a default sentence under section 8 of POCSO Act, vide impugned order of sentence dated 03.08.2017.

Learned counsel for the appellant has renewed the prayer primarily on the ground that the appellant has completed more than half of the custody since his arrest on 31st October 2016. Apart from that it is submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge as father of the victim P.W.1 has turned hostile and Doctor P.W.7 did not find any evidence of penetrative sexual assault or sexual intercourse as per the medical report (Ext.3). As such, appellant may be enlarged on bail.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer.

We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the materials placed from the lower court records and the period of custody undergone by the appellant.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances noted above and that the appellant has remained in custody for about 5 years and 2 months i.e. more than half of the sentence till date, we are inclined to

enlarge the appellant on bail by suspending the sentence during pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with POCSO Case No. 25/2016, subject to the condition that the appellant as well as his bailors shall not change their addresses and mobile numbers, if any, without prior permission of the learned trial court and shall submit Aadhar Cards at the time of his release. I.A. No.6826/2021 stands disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Shamim/