Jharkhand High Court
Mithlesh Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 760 of 2018
Mithlesh Yadav --- --- 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 : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shekhar Sinha, P.P
---
07/13.09.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Rakesh Kumar and
learned P.P. Mr. Shekhar Sinha on the prayer for suspension of sentence made
by this appellant through I.A. No.4203 of 2021.
2. The sole appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable
under Sections 366 of the I.P.C. and Sections 4/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012 by
the impugned judgment of conviction dated 10.05.2018 passed in S.T.
No.188/2016 by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1 cum Special
Judge, POCSO, Giridih and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- and a default sentence
under Section 366 of the I.P.C. and further sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- and a default sentence
under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and also sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 5 years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and a default sentence
under Section 8 of the POCSO Act vide impugned order of sentence dated
17.05.2018.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has
completed about 5 years and 5 months of custody since his arrest on 25th April
2016 against the maximum sentence of 10 years awarded to him. It is
submitted that the prosecution witnesses such as P.W.1, 3, 4 i.e. uncle, mother,
aunty and P.W.7 all are hearsay witnesses. The victim in her statement under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Ext.2) and in her deposition has stated that she had gone
on being allured on the pretext of marriage along with the appellant on a
bicycle. It shows that she had voluntarily accompanied the appellant and
travelled from one place to another for about 4-5 days when she was
recovered from Madhupur railway station by the Police along with the
appellant. It is submitted that the Medical Officer P.W.9 in his report Ext.3
recorded on 28th April 2016 has not given any definite opinion of rape rather
has stated that attempt of rape cannot be ruled out. In the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, the appellant who has served more than half of the custody,
may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence.
4. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the
victim has duly corroborated the allegation of abduction and rape. Victim has
been found to be a minor about 15 years of age as per the radiological
examination by the doctor P.W.9. Therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and taken into note the materials relied upon by them from the lower
court records including the period of custody undergone by the appellant.
6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances taken
note above and the period of more than half of the custody undergone by the
appellant, we are inclined to grant the privilege of suspension of sentence to
the appellant during pendency of the appeal. Appellant is directed to be
released 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
Additional Sessions Judge-1 cum Special Judge, POCSO, Giridih in
connection with S.T. No. 188/2016 with the condition that the appellant as
well as his bailors shall not change their addresses and mobile numbers, if
any, without prior permission of the learned trial court. I.A. No.4203 of 2021
stands disposed of.
7. Let the name of Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned P.P. appear in the
cause list henceforth in place of erstwhile A.P.P. Mr. Pranay Kumar Jaiswal.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Shamim/
