Rajkumar Routiya vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 996 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Rajkumar Routiya vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 February, 2024

Author: Ratnaker Bhengra

Bench: Ratnaker Bhengra, Ambuj Nath

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
               Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 482 of 2023

Rajkumar Routiya                                                       ... Appellant
                                        Versus
The State of Jharkhand                                                 ... Respondent

                                    ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

-----

     For the Appellant       : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
     For the State           : Ms. Amrita Kumari, APP
                                    -----
Order No.05 / Dated: 1st February, 2024
                  IA No. 663 of 2024

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the State on the interlocutory application filed by the appellant for suspension of sentence during the pendency of this criminal appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the FIR the victim has not named this appellant. Moreover, the victim has also not named the appellant in her statement under section 164 CrPC. Only in her evidence at the stage of trial she has referred the name of this appellant. The learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant's father name is Mahabir Routiya and, therefore, there is some confusion in the name and it is another person, who she has referred to. The learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant in his statement under section 313 CrPC has stated that he had gone for picnic on the date of occurrence. The learned counsel has pointed out to the deposition of the doctor and has submitted that the doctor has stated that there is no injury on the body of the victim that is really shocking, when it is alleged that six persons allegedly had committed rape upon her. The learned counsel has further submitted that the judgment is dated 17.01.2023 and the conviction of the appellant is actually done under the old provisions of the Act. Therefore, the appellant may also be granted privilege of suspension of sentence, during the pendency of this criminal appeal.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed this interlocutory application for suspension of sentence, during the pendency of this criminal appeal and has submitted that the victim has named the appellant in her evidence during trial. Moreover, she has identified the appellant in the dock.

Having gone through the records of the case, considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant, during pendency of this criminal appeal and accordingly, his prayer for suspension of sentence, during pendency of this criminal appeal, is rejected, in Sessions Trial Case No. 209 of 2010, arising out of Dumri PS Case No.01 of 2010.

Accordingly, IA No. 663 of 2024 stands dismissed.

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

(Ambuj Nath, J.) S.B./ Nibha