Jharkhand High Court
Niyaz Ansari @ Md. Niyaz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.13 of 2022
----
Niyaz Ansari @ Md. Niyaz Ansari .... .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----
For the Appellant : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Adv.
For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P.
For the Victim : Mr. Nilendu Kumar, Adv.
----
th
05/Dated: 19 July, 2022
I.A. No.1660 of 2022
1. This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant
under Section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for suspension of
sentence and releases him on bail, during pendency of the instant appeal.
2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 376
and 313 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment of conviction dated
17.12.2021 and order of sentence dated 21.12.2021 by which the appellant
has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight years and
fine of Rs.40,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of I.P.C. in default
thereof, further to undergo one year simple imprisonment and rigorous
imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence under
Section 313 of the I.P.C., in default thereof, to undergo four months simple
imprisonment, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII-cum-
FTC (Crime Against Women), Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No.278 of 2013
arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.96 of 2013 corresponding to G.R.
Case No.916 of 2013.
3. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the appellant
that the appellant is in custody since 17.12.2021. It has been alleged as per
the allegation that the appellant has sexually exploited the victim girl on the
pretext of marriage subsequently the marriage has taken place as per the
depositions of the father and mother of the victim girl including herself.
Thus, no offence is made out, so far as sexual exploitation is concerned. On
the above basis, the prayer for suspension of the sentence has been made.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and the informant
have opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that the marriage
is not being accepted by the parent of the appellant and as such he is not
entitled for bail.
5. Having heard both the parties. Once there is marriage between the
parties, subsequent denial or non-acceptance of marriage cannot come under
the criminal act.
6. Considering the above facts, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of
the appellant and enlarge him on bail on his furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII-cum-
FTC (Crime Against Women), Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No.278 of 2013
arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.96 of 2013 corresponding to G.R.
Case No.916 of 2013, subject to the condition that the appellant will submit
self-attested photocopy of his Aadhar Card and also submit his mobile
number before the learned court below which he will always keep active and
will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of
the court.
7. In the result, I.A. No.1660 of 2022 is, hereby, allowed.
8. The appellant shall remain present before the Court, when the appeal
is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail shall be cancelled.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Amar/-
