Jharkhand High Court
Karan Tantu Bai vs The State Of Jharkhand on 27 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B) No. 1092 of 2019
Karan Tantu Bai .... 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 State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P
---
06/27.10.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Mrs. Rashmi Kumar
nominated by High Court Legal Services Committee to represent the appellant
and learned A.P.P, Mrs. Vandana Bharti on the prayer for suspension of
sentence of this appellant made through I.A. No. 10369 of 2019.
Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 376(2) of I.P.C and Sections 6, 10 of POCSO Act by the impugned
judgment dated 05.12.2018 passed in SPECIAL POCSO Case No. 39 of 2018
by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge-cum-
FTC, Bokaro and has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 14
years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- under Section 376(2) of I.P.C and default
sentence by the impugned order of sentence dated 06.12.2018. However, no
separate sentence has been awarded under POCSO Act in view of Section 42
thereof.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the case of the
prosecution of rape upon 8-9 years old girl is not supported by the medical
evidence of Doctor (P.W.6), who examined her on the next date i.e. 12th April,
2018 at 05:50 p.m., by any stretch of imagination vide Ext.-4, medical report.
No injury on private part i.e., vagina or anus was found. No sign of recent
sexual intercourse was found. Ext.5 is the vaginal swab report, which also does
not suggest presence of sperm. The appellant has been falsely implicated and
except related witnesses i.e. P.W. 1, maternal grandmother, P.W.3, elder sister,
P.W.7, father and informant, other witnesses, P.W. 2 and P.W.9 are hearsay.
The case has not been established to the hilt. No material exhibits of clothes
were sent to F.S.L. Surprisingly, the husband of the elder sister of the victim
(P.W.3), in whose house the offence was allegedly committed, has not been
examined. The incidence is said to have happened at around 07:30 p.m in the
evening. The house of the victim and her elder sister (P.W.3) are separate. It is
wholly unlikely that at such point of time, the victim would happen to be in the
house of elder sister and the appellant would also arrive with an intention to
commit rape upon her. In any case, no ingredients of rape have been proved and
the appellant has not been charged with the offence of attempt to rape.
Therefore, appellant who is in custody since 12th April, 2018 may be enlarged
on bail by suspending the sentence.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer. She submits
that the victim (P.W.4), who is 8 years old and has also been determined to be
between 8-9 years as per the radiological examination by P.W. 6, the doctor,
has clearly narrated the immoral and illegal act of the appellant, who took her
into the washroom and tried to commit rape upon her when the elder sister
arrived and managed to save her. She found both the victim and the appellant
were naked. The other prosecution witnesses such as P.W. 1 and P.W 7 have
also supported the occurrence. No motive to implicate the appellant falsely has
been shown on the part of the defence. Therefore, appellant may not be
enlarged on bail, at this stage.
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 said to have been undergone by
him.
On consideration of the materials on record, particularly the
statement of 8 years old victim (P.W.4), her elder sister (P.W.3) and other
witnesses, we are not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail, at this stage
considering the gravity of offence. Accordingly, his prayer for suspension of
sentence is rejected.
Consequently, I.A. No. 10369 of 2019 is dismissed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Jk/
