Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1149 Jhar
Judgement Date : 16 March, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 32 of 2023
Sanjay Hari @ Sanjay Ram @ Sanjay Kumar Ram
....... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ....... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
----------
For the Appellant : Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P
-----------
th
06/Dated: 16 March, 2023
Per: Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
I.A. No.194 of 2023
This interlocutory application has been filed under section 389(1) of
the Cr. P.C for suspension of sentence passed in consequence of the
judgment of conviction dated 19.12.2022 and order of sentence dated
20.12.2022 in Spl. (POCSO) Case No.61 of 2020 by learned Special Judge-
POCSO Act, Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been
convicted under Section 376 of the I.P.C and Section 4 of POCSO Act and
directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of
Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and in case of
default of fine to undergo additional imprisonment of one month and period
of detention already undergone during investigation and trial will be set off
against the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant and entire
amount of fine shall be paid to victim as a compensation in terms of Section
357(1) of Cr. P. C read with Section 9(2) of POCSO Rules, 2020.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the
basis of adding of charge under section 376 of the I.P.C and Section 4 of the
POCSO Act is absolutely not available in this case, since, as would appear
from the testimony of the witnesses that there was consent of the victim as
has been deposed by the victim herself and therefore, the basic ingredient of
commission of rape which ought to have been taken into consideration by
the trial court since has not been taken into consideration, therefore, it is a fit
case where the sentence is to be suspended.
While on the other hand, Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P appearing
for the State has vehemently opposed the instant application inter alia on the
ground that P.W-1, the victim was found to be minor as per the discussion
made by the learned trial court at paragraph 26 of the impugned judgment
and basis upon which the learned trial court has given specific finding as
would appear from paragraph 28 wherein it has been observed that since the
victim was minor and child below the age of 18 years and as such the victim
since comes within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of the POCSO Act,
therefore, the plea of the mutual relationship of the accused with the victim
cannot be said to be accepted.
Learned A.P.P on the basis of the aforesaid ground has submitted that
it is not a fit case where the sentence is to be suspended.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
It appears from the order dated 02.02.2023 that while admitting the
appeal the Lower Court Record has been called for. We have perused the
Lower Court Record.
This Court on consideration of the finding recorded by the learned
trial court has found that the learned trial court has come to the conclusive
finding on the basis of the fact that the victim was found to be minor and as
such the very plea of consensual commission of intercourse has been
disbelieved. Although we are not dealing with the case on merit, since, the
appeal is pending.
Thus, on the basis of the testimony of the P.W-1, the victim and the
same having been corroborated by the other witnesses, we are not prima
facie satisfied to suspend the sentence.
Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Saket/-
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!