Manish Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 7728 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence

                      Application No.317/2021

                                       In

               S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 491/2021

Manish Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Suresh Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Badh Fatehpura Via Begus,
Jaipur West. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur
                                                         ----Accused-Appellant
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The PP
                                                                ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh with Mr. Jaswant Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhawani Shankar Sharma, PP Mr. Rajendra Singh Raghav for complainant

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS

Order

16/12/2021

Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

The appellant has filed the appeal along with application for

suspension of sentence.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and

order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the Court of Special Judge,

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, No.3, Jaipur

Metropolitan-I in Sessions Case No.03/2019 (67/2019), by which

the appellant has been convicted under Sections 363 and 376(2)

(2 of 4)

(N) of IPC and sentenced to maximum term of ten years.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant

that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. The

learned trial court has erred in convicting and sentencing the

accused-appellant. The prosecutrix went with the appellant on her

own free will. She was major at the time of alleged incident. Her

date of birth has not been proved by reliable evidence by the

prosecution. Prosecutrix has been examined as P.W.2. Her

statement does not inspire confidence as it suffers from material

contradictions and infirmities. She has stated in her cross-

examination that she travelled with the appellant by train and by

other public transport and there were many people at the railway

station and during her train journey but despite having

opportunity to raise alarm or protest or to make complaint to any

person, no such act was done. Further she has admitted that she

did not make any complaint to any person during her stay in hotel

and in the house, where two people were there. She has further

admitted that the appellant used to go out for job and she was left

alone at house but even during that period, she did not try to

escape from the place where she was residing. She has also

admitted that they purchased clothes from market and no such

complaint was made to any person, though there were several

persons in the market. The prosecutrix was recovered from

Bhilwara on 26.02.2019/27.02.2019. Witnesses have stated that

the appellant was also arrested from the very same place and on

the same date, but Ex.P.13 reveals that the arrest of appellant

was made on 05.03.2019. Prosecutrix in her court statement

(3 of 4)

resiled from her police statements in material particulars.

Similarly, statements of father of the prosecutrix-P.W.1 suffers

from material contradictions. Statements of P.W.15 also show that

the prosecutrix was a consenting party. Medical evidence and FSL

report do not connect the appellant with the crime.

Learned counsel has further submitted that during trial, the

appellant was on bail and now, he has already served about one

year of sentence. Hearing of appeal is likely to take long time.

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the

complainant, has opposed the application for suspension of

sentence and has submitted that the prosecutrix and other

witnesses have corroborated the prosecution version. The

prosecutrix has stated that she was raped by the appellant at

various places under threatening. Medical evidence also

corroborates the offence of appellant. FSL report is also against

the appellant. The prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident as

per her school certificate.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and scanned the

evidence available on record carefully.

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel

for the appellant, overall facts and circumstances of the case but

without commenting upon detailed merits of the case, this Court

deems just and proper to allow the application for suspension of

sentence.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is

allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-

appellant Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Suresh Kumar

Sharma shall remain suspended till disposal of this criminal

(4 of 4)

appeal and he be released on bail, provided the appellant

furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of

Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for

his appearance in this Court on 17th January, 2022 and as and

when called upon to do so.

(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J

Hemant/10

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)