Kerala High Court
Arjun Jyothi vs State Of Kerala on 4 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
Thursday, the 4th day of April 2024 / 15th Chaithra, 1946
CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2023 IN CRL.A NO.1770 OF 2023
SC 242/2021 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, ALUVA
APPLICANT/APPELLANT:
ARJUN JYOTHI, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O GOPINATHAN NAIR, JYOTHISREE HOUSE,
SRA-II, OPP. S & S AUDITORIUM, NEAR HARIPAD JUNCTION, ALAPPUZHA, PIN
- 690514.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to suspend the execution of sentence and to release
the appellant on bail.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.SAIJO HASSAN, BENOJ C AUGUSTIN,
AATHIRA SUNNY, SARITHA K., ASWIN K.R., SALMAN FARIS, Advocates for the
petitioner and of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court
passed the following:
P.T.O.
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2023
in
Crl.Appeal No.1770 of 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2024
ORDER
This is a petition filed by the appellant under Section
389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code). The
petitioner would contend that he is innocent and there is
every chance for allowing the appeal and acquitting him. He
was on bail during the trial of the case. In such
circumstances, he claims that he is entitled to get his
sentence suspended.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor filed an objection on
behalf of the respondent. It is contended that the evidence
adduced by the prosecution proved beyond doubt that the
petitioner had committed the offence alleged against him. The
offence proved against the petitioner is grievous. Considering
the gravity and nature of the offence and the tenure of the
sentence imposed, the petitioner is not entitled to get an
order to suspend the sentence.
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2023 in
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The petitioner was convicted for offences
punishable under Section 376(1) and 354 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. The term of sentence the petitioner has to
undergo is imprisonment for 10 years.
5. The charge levelled against the petitioner was that
at about 7.00 pm on 05.05.2020, while the victim was staying
along with the petitioner at his residential apartment, she was
subjected to rape at that house. She was threatened also not
to disclose the matter to anyone else. The trial court,
believing the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found the
petitioner guilty as mentioned above.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the incident as narrated by the victim is quite improbable
and quite unlikely to happen at such a place and in such a
time. The delay occasioned in lodging the complaint is fatal to
the prosecution inasmuch as the victim is a grown up and
sufficiently educated woman. She continued her routine
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2023 in
avocation after the incident and even stayed along with the
petitioner after the incident. The learned Public Prosecutor
strongly refutes the said contentions. It is submitted that the
delay has sufficient explanation and the evidence of the victim
is found reliable by the trial court. Hence, the petitioner is not
entitled for an order suspending execution of the sentence.
Having gone through the judgment and considered the
available materials, prima facie, I am unable to agree with the
contention that the findings leading to conviction of the
petitioner is wrong.
7. The period of sentence imposed is 10 years. He
was convicted and sentenced on 20.10.2023. The contentions
raised by the petitioner to assail the impugned judgment
require deeper consideration. Considering that and other
mitigating circumstances, I am of the view that execution of
sentence can be suspended subject to conditions.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is
granted bail on his executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees one lakh only), with two solvent sureties for the like
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2023 in
amount each, to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to
the following conditions:
i) He shall deposit entire fine amount in the trial court
within one month;
ii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any
offence; and
iii) He shall not contact or try to intimidate the victim or
witnesses examined in the case.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to apply before this Court for
cancellation of the suspension of sentence.
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
PV
04-04-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
