Jharkhand High Court
Sonu @ Azad Mansuri vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 577 of 2019
Sonu @ Azad Mansuri .... 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 : Ms. Aanya Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P
---
08/ 01.09.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Aanya Singh and Mr.
Rakesh Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the
prayer for suspension of sentence made by this appellant through I.A. No. 3075
of 2021.
Sole appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable under
Sections 342 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned judgment dated
13.07.2018 passed in S.T. No. 252 of 2018 by the Court of learned Additional
Judicial Commissioner-XII-cum-Spl. Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi and has been
sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.
20,000/- and a default sentence under Section 376 of I.P.C and further sentenced
to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months under Section 342 of I.P.C by the
impugned order of sentence dated 18.07.2018.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim (P.W.1)
has alleged that on 21st January, 2018 while going to deliver clothes to her
mother, she was forcibly taken away by the appellant in his room, the room was
locked from outside. Thereafter, he came inside the room by scaling the
boundary wall and committed rape upon her. When her brother (P.W.3) and
maternal uncle (P.W.4) tried to catch him, he fled away. The accused did not pay
heed to the Panchayat, therefore, F.I.R was registered on 22nd January, 2018. It is
submitted that out of six prosecution witnesses, the victim's mother (P.W.2),
victim's brother (P.W.3) and her maternal uncle (P.W.4) all have turned hostile.
It is submitted that the Doctor (P.W.6), who has examined the victim on 23rd
January, 2018 has found that it's a case of old rupture of hymen with no live or
dead sperm present in the vaginal smear. No stain or semen or blood etc. were
found on her clothes. Her age was assessed to be between 18-19 years as per
Radiological examination. It is submitted that the appellant is cousin brother of
the victim, who has been implicated on false allegations. It is further submitted
that the victim (P.W.1) has also, in her deposition, tried to improve her case,
which has not been corroborated by the evidence as no blood or semen were
found on her cloths. Therefore, appellant, who is in custody for more than 3
years by now, may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and the relevant materials relied upon by them from the Lower Court
Records and in view of the opinion of doctor (P.W.6) as Ext-3 and that victim's
mother, brother and maternal uncle, P.Ws. 2 to 4 all have turned hostile, we are
inclined to grant bail to the appellant by suspending his 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 Judicial Commissioner-XII-cum-Spl.
Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in connection with S.T No. 252 of 2018 with the
condition that the appellant and his bailors shall not change their address or
mobile number without permission of the learned Trial Court.
I.A. No. 3075 of 2021 stands allowed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Jk/
