Ravi Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 4528 Jhar

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 243 of 2018
                                        ......

       Ravi Kumar Singh                                    --- --- Appellant
                                Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                              --- --- Respondent
                                           ---

CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo

---

             For the Appellant         : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Adv.
             For the State             : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
                                       ---
07/11.11.2022        Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Anurag Kashyap and

learned A.P.P. on the renewed prayer for suspension of sentence of the appellant made through I.A. No.3763 of 2022.

Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act vide impugned judgment of conviction dated 15.12.2017 passed in G.R. Case No.464/2015 by the learned court of Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge, Jamshedpur and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years under both the offences with additional fine of Rs.25,000/- under Section 6 of the POCSO Act with a default sentence. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently vide impugned order of sentence dated 21.12.2017.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has remained in custody since 17th February 2015 i.e. about 7 years and 9 months i.e. more than half of the custody against the sentence of 14 years awarded upon him. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that though the age of the victim is assessed as 10-11 years as per the radiological report adduced by the Doctor P.W.8 who examined her, but she has not found any injury on her private parts. He further submits that only in view of her finding as to rupture of hymen within 24-28 hours she has concluded that sexual intercourse with the victim had taken place. He submitted that no spermatozoa was found in the swab or smear and as per her observation rape could not be ruled out. It is submitted that prosecution witnesses such as P.W.5, 6 and 7 and P.W.4 are all relatives i.e. uncle, mother, brother and father (informant). He submitted that since the appellant has remained in custody for 7 years and 9 months by now, he may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. It is pointed out that the age of the victim was assessed as 10-11 years only. Doctor has also found blood clots in pubic examination.

On consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the materials placed on record and the period of custody of 7 years and 9 months approximately gone against the sentence of 14 years, we are inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail by suspending the sentence during pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge, Jamshedpur in connection with G.R. Case No.464/2015, subject to the conditions that the one of the bailors should be the close relative of the appellant and the other should be the deponent of this interlocutory application; appellant as well as his bailors shall not change their residential addresses and mobile numbers, if any, without prior permission of the learned trial court and shall submit Aadhar Cards at the time of his release. I.A. No.3763/2022 stands disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Shamim/