Jharkhand High Court
Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Kumar Paswan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1174 of 2018
Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Kumar Paswan --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Through: Video Conferencing
---
For the Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, A.P.P
---
06 / 24.06.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Ms. Rashmi Kumar and learned
A.P.P Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava on the prayer for suspension of sentence
made through I.A. No. 2274/2021.
2. The sole appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable under
section 4 of POCSO Act and section 342 of the Indian Penal Code by the
impugned judgment dated 14.09.2018 passed in G.R. No. 116/2016 / Special
POCSO Case No. 12/2016 by the Court of learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special POCSO Court, Koderma and has been sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fourteen years with a fine of Rs. 30,000/-
and default sentence under section 4 of POCSO Act and further sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for six months under section 342 of the Indian
Penal Code, by the impugned order of sentence dated 18.09.2018. Both the
sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per the case of the
prosecution, appellant and the victim family are neighbours. The alleged
incidence is of 02.02.2016 and the FIR has been lodged on 05.02.2016 after
unexplained delay. The doctor (PW-6) who examined the victim on 05.02.2016,
found her to be 17-18 years of age, as per radiological examination. According
to the opinion of the doctor, no spermatozoa was found in the vaginal smear and
she was found sexually experienced. It is submitted that the photographs of the
appellant and the victim were put to the victim in her cross-examination which
she accepted. Certain letters written by her were also put in cross-examination
which also she does not deny, except that it was under pressure. The mother of
the victim (PW-2) has, in her deposition at paragraph-5, stated that the appellant
had physical relationship with the victim on 2-3 occasions earlier. It is further
submitted that as per the statement of the prosecution witnesses, family
members of the appellant were inside the house when allegedly victim was
being subjected to forcible sexual intercourse, which is quite unbelievable. He
has remained in custody for one year and five months during trial and since his
conviction from 14.09.2018, in total about four years and two months.
Therefore, appellant who is 25 years old, may be enlarged on bail by granting
him the privilege of suspension of sentence.
4. Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer. He submits that as per the case of
the prosecution and the statements of her father (PW-4), mother (PW-2) and
sister (PW-5), victim was about 16 years of age and despite the fact that lot of
persons assembled before the house of the appellant, he opened the door after
two hours on repeated insistence. The minor girl has been subjected to forcible
sexual intercourse upon inducement. Therefore, appellant may not be enlarged
on bail.
5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
parties and taken into account the materials relied upon by them from the lower
court records. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances including
the statements of the mother (PW-2) at paragraph-5 of her deposition, opinion
of the Medical Officer (PW-6) regarding age of the victim between 17 to 18
years and absence of any rape as also certain pictures and letters adduced by the
defence during cross-examination of the victim, we are inclined to enlarge the
appellant on bail by granting him the privilege of suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, the appellant- Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Kumar Paswan, shall be
released on bail, during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each,
to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-
Special POCSO Court, Koderma in connection with G.R. No. 116/2016 /
Special POCSO Case No. 12/2016, subject to the condition that he and his
bailors shall not change their address or mobile number without permission of
the learned Trial Court and the appellant shall not indulge in any threat or
pressure upon the victim or her family.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Ranjeet/
