Jharkhand High Court
Raushan Kr. Dom @ Raushan Kumar Dom vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 142 of 2021
Raushan Kr. Dom @ Raushan Kumar Dom --- --- 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 : Mrs. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.
05/25.11.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mrs. Rashmi Kumar and
Mr. Satish Prasad, learned A.P.P. on the prayer for suspension of
sentence made by the appellant through I.A. No. 3576 of 2021.
This appellant along with one Veeru Kr. Hari stands convicted for
the offence punishable under Section 376 D of the I.P.C and Section 6 and
12 of the POCSO Act by the impugned judgment dated 19.06.2021 passed
in Telaiya P.S. Case No. 248/2019 / Special POCSO Case No. 03/2020 by
the Court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special
POCSO Court, Koderma and both the convicts have been sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life, which means imprisonment for the
remainder of natural life with a fine of Rs.50,000/- each and a default
sentence each u/s 6 of the POCSO Act; R.I. for 2 years with a fine of
Rs.1000/- each and a default sentence each u/s 12 of the POCSO Act by
the impugned order of sentence dated 25.06.2021. Both the sentences
were ordered to run concurrently. No separate sentence has been awarded
under Section 376-D I.P.C in view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that case of the appellant
stands on similar footing as that of the other co-convict Veeru Kumar
Hari, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2021
in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 157 of 2021. It is further submitted that the
allegation of rape by the father of the victim P.W.3 is on both the accused /
convicts but the same has been falsified by the medical evidence adduced
by P.W. 4 Doctor, who has examined the victim on 05.12.2019. She has
found no sign of recent sexual assault or injury on the private part of the
victim and more significantly the hymen was not found ruptured. There
was no medical assessment of the age of the victim though as per the
victim, she was 16 years old. The alleged incidence said to have occurred
on 29.11.2019 but the F.I.R was instituted on 04.12.2019, after a gap of 6
days without any plausible explanation. It is further submitted that the
accused persons have been implicated as the victim and her boyfriend
were found in compromising position by the two accused persons in a
lonely place which is a 'samshan ghat', as per the statement of the victim
P.W.1 herself. Therefore, if the ingredients of offences have not been
made out by medical evidence and in fact the medical evidence
completely demolish the ocular testimony, then the benefit of doubt
should go to the accused. On these considerations prayer for bail of the
co-convict Veeru Kumar Hari has been allowed by this Court. Therefore,
appellant who is in custody since 05.12.2019 may be enlarged on bail by
suspending his sentence.
Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer. He submits that the victim, a
minor having date of birth 12.08.2003 was accosted by these two accused
persons in a lonely place and they committed rape upon her on the point
of dagger. He however does not dispute that on similar materials prayer
for suspension of sentence of the co-convict Veeru Kumar Hari has been
allowed by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2021 in Criminal Appeal
(DB) No. 157 of 2021.
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 record including the period of custody undergone by the appellant. It
appears on consideration of the materials on record that the case of the
appellant stands on similar footing as that of the co-convict Veeru Kumar
Hari, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated
27.10.2021 in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 157 of 2021. Having regard to
the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that case of the
appellant stands on similar footing as that of co-convict Veeru Kumar
Hari, we are inclined to grant the privilege of suspension of sentence to
the appellant.
Accordingly, the appellant, named above, during the pendency of
this appeal, shall be enlarged on bail 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 Telaiya
P.S. Case No. 248/2019 / Special POCSO Case No. 03/2020 with the
condition that he and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile
number without permission of the learned Trial Court and that appellant
as well as his bailors would also submit the Aadhar Card before the court
below at the time of furnishing bail bonds.
I.A. No. 3576 of 2021stands allowed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
A.Mohanty
