Putilal Soren vs State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2190 Jhar

                                 -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.1256 of 2021
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.45 of 2020

     Putilal Soren                              ......       Appellant
                             Versus
     State of Jharkhand                         .....    Respondent
                             ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

For the Appellant : Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suchendra Prasad, A.P.P.

---------

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

03/Dated: 05th July, 2021

I.A. No.1256 of 2021

1. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and grant of ad-interim bail, to the appellant, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2019 and order of sentence dated 19.12.2019, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - II -cum- F.T.C., Offences against Women, Dumka, in Sessions Trial No.124 of 2015, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand), in default thereof, to suffer rigorous imprisonment of one year.

3. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the appellant that the appellant has remained in custody for more than two years. The allegation against this appellant is that he had established sexual relationship with the victim girl on the pretext of marriage and subsequently marriage has been denied. Referring to the deposition of the prosecutrix, i.e., P.W. - 6, it has been pointed out by the learned senior counsel that the sexual relationship was

consensual as it was customary in Santhal Tribes to live-in- relationship for knowing each other. On the above facts, prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. Considering the deposition of the prosecutrix and the period of custody of the appellant, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge - II -cum- F.T.C., Offences against Women, Dumka, in connection with S.T. No.124 of 2015.

However, the court below, before issuing the release order, shall satisfy itself regarding the fact that the appellant has remained in custody for two years, if not, the release order shall not be issued and the matter shall be reported to this Court.

6. I.A. No.1256 of 2021 stands allowed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-