Jharkhand High Court
Bullet Mandal @ Sanjay Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 641 of 2020
Bullet Mandal @ Sanjay Mandal ....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. Vikash Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, A.P.P
---
05/23.11.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Vikash Kumar and
learned A.P.P, Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha on the prayer for suspension of
sentence made by this appellant through I.A. No. 2495 of 2021.
Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 376(i) of I.P.C by the impugned judgment dated 6th October, 2020
passed in Sessions Trial No. 118 of 2018 by the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella-Kharsawan and has been sentenced to undergo
Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and default
sentence by the impugned order of sentence dated 9th October, 2020.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the informant is the
husband (P.W.5), who has lodged the F.I.R on 3rd May, 2018 alleging rape of
his wife (P.W.6) on 2nd May, 2018 by the accused-appellant, who was caught
by the brother of the informant/Devar of the victim (P.W.1). It is submitted that
both P.Ws. 1 & 3, cousin brother, have turned hostile and not supported the
case of the prosecution. The doctor (P.W.9), who examined the victim, has not
found any sign of rape vide Ext.3. Appellant has been implicated for some
grudge, but there are no materials evidence to prove the case. Therefore,
appellant, who has been in custody since 04th May, 2018 till date i.e. about 3
years and 6 months, may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer. He submits
that the victim has testified as P.W.6 and supported the act of rape committed
upon her by the appellant during the day time when the informant-husband
(P.W5) had gone out to purchase vegetables. Since the victim was married
lady, the Doctor (P.W.9) may not have been found any explicit sign of rape.
Therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.
We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the materials relied upon by them from the Lower
Court Records, including the period of custody undergone by him.
It appears from consideration of the materials placed from the
Lower Court Records that the allegations made in the F.I.R do not stand
supported by the prosecution witness nos. 1 & 3, though it was alleged that the
accused was caught by them after the act while fleeing. Doctor has also not
found any sign of rape though the victim was examined on the next date of
occurrence i.e., 3rd May, 2018. No external injury on the private part were
found neither were spermatozoa present in the vaginal swab.
Taking into account all the facts and circumstances, we are
inclined to grant bail to the appellant by suspending the sentence during
pendency of this appeal. Accordingly, appellant, above-named, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella-
Kharsawan in connection with Sessions Trial No. 118 of 2018 with the
condition that appellant and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile
number without permission of the learned Trial Court.. Appellant and their
bailors shall also furnish their photo copy of Aadhar Card before the Trial
Court at the time of his release.
I.A. No. 2495 of 2021 stands allowed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Jk/
