Pankaj Tiwari @ Pankaj Tiwary vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 4397 Jhar

                                   -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.8174 of 2022
                            In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.649 of 2022

     Pankaj Tiwari @ Pankaj Tiwary             ......       Appellant
                             Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                    .....    Respondent
                             ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

     For the Appellant       : Mr. J. N. Upadhyay, Advocate
     For the State           : Mr. N. K. Singh, A.P.P.
                              ---------
               rd
03/Dated: 03        November, 2022
I.A. No.8174 of 2022

1. The present interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and grant of ad-interim bail, to the appellant, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 05.08.2022 and order of sentence dated 12.08.2022, passed by the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Seraikella-Kharsawan, in G.R. No.1221 of 2016, corresponding to Gamharia P.S. Case No.89 of 2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 504/ 506/ 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 & 8 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo the maximum sentence of eight years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a default clause for the offence under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that although the victim has claimed herself as a student but no document has been proved. Photocopy of birth certificate has been brought on record which has been disbelieved. The medical assessment suggests the age of the victim as 16 years that can be plus minus 2 and on that basis conviction under the POCSO Act is bad in law. Further, the victim girl has given her statement under 164 Cr.P.C, which suggests that it was consensual. The medical evidence negates the physical relationship. On the above basis, prayer for suspension of sentence has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.

5. Considering the above fact, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant on bail, during the pendency

of the appeal, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Seraikella- Kharsawan, in G.R. No.1221 of 2016, corresponding to Gamharia P.S. Case No.89 of 2016, subject to the condition that the appellant will remain present before the Court when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail shall be cancelled.

6. I.A. No.8174 of 2022 stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-