Jharkhand High Court
Aman Toppo vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1023 of 2018
Aman Toppo --- --- 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. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Adv.
For the State : Mrs. Niki Sinha, A.P.P.
08/28.09.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Kripa Shankar
Nanda and learned A.P.P. Mrs. Niki Sinha on the prayer for suspension of
sentence of this appellant made through I.A. No.5030 of 2021.
2. Sole appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable
under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act vide
impugned judgment dated 10.04.2018 passed in S.T. Case No.133/2016 by the
court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga and has been
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of
Rs.10,000/- each and a default sentence each under both Section 376 of the
I.P.C. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act vide impugned order of sentence dated
12.04.2018. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim was
assessed as between 17-18 years of age as per radiological examination by the
Medical Board of 3 doctors whose report Ext.6 was adduced by the Doctor
P.W.8. P.W.6 another doctor who examined the victim on 13 th August 2016
just on the next date of the incidence at 10.40 A.M. did not find any evidence
of recent sexual activities, though as per her opinion she had sexual
intercourse earlier. No external injury nor any sperm was found on the vaginal
swab. It is submitted that the appellant has remained in custody since 13 th
August 2016 and thereby completed 5 years and 1½ months of custody i.e.
more than half of the sentence under either of the Sections. Therefore, the
appellant may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.
4. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. She submits that the
victim a 15 years old girl is the informant (P.W.3) as per whom she was way-
laid while returning from work at 5.30 P.M. by the appellant in a lonely place
and was subjected to physical intercourse. She was also threatened not to
disclose. Therefore, appellant may not be enlarged on bail.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the materials on record relied upon by them from the
lower court records including the period of custody undergone by the
appellant.
6. Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances
above and that the appellant has remained in custody for more than half of the
sentence, 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-I, Lohardaga in connection with S.T. Case
No.133/2016 subject to condition that the appellant shall deposit the total fine
amount in the court below at the time of release with further 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.
5030 of 2021 stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Shamim/
