Jharkhand High Court
Pawan Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 499 of 2018
Pawan Kumar Singh --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
For the Appellant : M/s Rashmi Kumar, Indu Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.
05/20.10.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the prayer for suspension
of sentence made by the appellant through I.A. No. 9433 of 2022.
Appellant stood convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 376 of the I.P.C by the impugned judgment dated 06.04.2018
passed in S.T. No. 73 of 2016 by the court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-1, Ramgarh and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years
with a fine of Rs.5000/- and a default sentence by the impugned order of
sentence dated 09.04.2018.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim was in
living relationship with the appellant as per the statement of P.W.1
neighbour of the victim, P.W.2 a teacher and P.W.3 father of the victim
and the informant herself as P.W.5. It has also come in the statement of the
informant P.W.5 that both had accompanied to Surat and had regular
physical relationship but on asking to marry, the appellant refused and
told her to abort the pregnancy. Appellant had posed as a schedule tribe
person but actually he was from forward class and working as clerk in the
C.C.L. The medical report (Ext.4) adduced by the doctor P.W9 shows no
injury on the private part and no spermatozoa was found and there was no
bleeding also. The victim has stated her age to be about 35 years.
Appellant has remained in custody from 18.02.2016 till 25.07.2016 during
trial and since his conviction on 09.04.2018 i.e., about few days less than
5 years. As such, appellant may be enlarged on bail as the relationship was
consensual between the parties.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. He submits that earlier the
application for suspension of sentence of the appellant was rejected by
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.06.2018 and was
dismissed as not pressed on 28.07.2021.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and the materials placed from record and in view of the statements
of the prosecution witnesses, such as P.W.1, 2 and 3 as also the informant
P.W.5 and the report (Ext.4) of the Doctor P.W.9 and also that appellant
has completed custody of about few days less than 5 years, we are
inclined to grant the privilege of suspension of sentence to the appellant.
Accordingly, the appellant, named above, during the pendency of
this appeal, shall be enlarged 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, Ramgarh
in connection with S.T. No. 73 of 2016 with the condition that appellant
and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile number without
permission of the learned Trial Court. That one of the bailor should be a
close relative and that the appellant as well as his bailors would also
submit the Aadhar Card before the court below at the time of furnishing
bail bonds.
I.A. No. 9433 of 2022 stands allowed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
A.Mohanty
