Jharkhand High Court
Sarfuddin Ansari @ Palmoha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 18 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1365 of 2018
Sarfuddin Ansari @ Palmoha --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
---
For the Appellant: Mr. Shekhar Pd. Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Tapas Roy, A. P.P
---
07 / 18.11.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha and
learned A.P.P Mr. Tapas Roy on the prayer for suspension of sentence of this
appellant made through I.A. No. 3694 / 2021.
2. The sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of POCSO Act by the
impugned judgment dated 20.08.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No. 112/2014 by
the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga and has been
sentenced to undergo R.I for twelve years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and
default sentence under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and further
sentenced in similar manner under section 4 of POCSO Act by the impugned
order of sentence dated 24.08.2018.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the alleged occurrence is
of 12.04.2014 but FIR was instituted on 18.04.2014 after about six days by the
father of the victim (PW-10). He has referred to the statement of the victim
(PW-3) and submits that it is quite unbelievable that the clothes which was
allegedly put into the mouth of the victim by the appellant was taken out after
five days by the victim. By referring to the statement of the doctor (PW-7) who
adduced the assessment of age vide Ext.3, she was 17 to 18 years of age, as per
radiological examination. Another doctor (PW-8) who examined her medically
on 18.04.2014 found no mark of violence or injury on her private part; hymen
was old ruptured. She did not find any evidence of recent sexual activity. It is
submitted that the appellant has remained in custody since 07.06.2014 i.e. about
seven years, five months and odd days against the sentence of twelve years
imposed upon him. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by suspending his
sentence.
4 Learned A.P.P Mr. Roy has opposed the prayer and submits that the
victim has stood the test of cross-examination and supported the prosecution
story as made out in the FIR and also in her statement under section 164 of the
Cr. P.C made before the Judicial Magistrate (PW-9) vide Ext.5). It is submitted
that the appellant aged 65 years and being neighbour, has committed heinous
offence on a minor girl. Therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and taken note of the materials relied upon from the lower court records.
Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances noted above and that
the appellant has remained in custody for about seven years five months and
odd days by now, we are inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail by suspending
his sentence during pendency of this appeal. Accordingly, Appellant Sarfuddin
Ansari @ Palmoha shall be released on bail, during 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 Additional Sessions
Judge-I, Lohardaga in Sessions Trial No. 112/2014, subject to deposit of fine
amount before the learned court below and that the appellant and his bailors
shall not change their address or mobile nos. without permission of the learned
Trial Court and Appellant and his bailors shall also furnish their Aadhar Card
before the learned Trial Court at the time of his release. I.A. No. 3694 /2021
stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Ranjeet/
