Rakesh Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4326 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         I.A. No.955 of 2021
                                  In
                Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.629 of 2020
                                 ----

Rakesh Mandal                                .... .... Appellant
                               Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Sunita Devi                               .... .... Respondents
                                 ----
      CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
                                 ----
For the Appellant                     : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Adv.
For the State                         : Mr. Suraj Verma, A.P.P.
                                 ----
              nd
05/Dated: 22 November, 2021

      I.A. No.955 of 2021

1. This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for suspension of sentence and releases him on bail, during pendency of the instant appeal.

2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.03.2020 by which the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.5,000/- for said offence under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and in default thereof, further to undergo imprisonment of two months, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Spl. POCSO Case No.2363 of 2018 arising out of Barmamines P.S. Case No.69 of 2018 (G.R. Case No.2363 of 2018).

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since 14.07.2018. No independent witness has been examined. Further, it has been submitted that the appellant is ready to abide by any condition as will be imposed by the Hon'ble Court. On the above basis, the prayer for suspension of the sentence has been made.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. Considering the period of custody, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant and enlarge him on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Spl. POCSO Case No.2363 of 2018 arising out of Barmamines P.S. Case No.69 of 2018 (G.R. Case No.2363 of 2018), subject to the condition that the appellant will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

6. In the result, I.A. No.955 of 2021 is, hereby, allowed.

7. However, the trial court is directed to satisfy itself before issuing the release order, "whether the appellant has remained in custody for three years or not?" If the appellant has not remained in custody for three years then the release order shall not be issued by the trial court and the matter will be reported to this Court.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Amar/-