Rajasthan High Court
Dharmveer @ Dharmu Sahriya Son Of ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 November, 2021
Bench: Manoj Kumar Vyas
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. (SOS) Application No.913/2021
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1491/2021
Dharmveer @ Dharmu Sahriya Son Of Nengilal, Aged About 24
Years, Resident Of Barodiya, Police Station Kishanganj, District
Baran (Rajasthan) (Accused Appellant Is Confined In District Jail,
Baran)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aslam S. Khan for
Mr. Girish Khandelwal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhawani Shankar Sharma, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS
Order
23/11/2021
1. Heard on application for suspension of sentence.
2. The appellant has filed the appeal along with application for
suspension of sentence.
3. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction and sentence dated 02.09.2021 passed by the Court of
Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and Commission for Protection of Child Right Act, 2005, No.2
Baran (Rajasthan) in Session Case No.139/2018 (CIS
No.08/2018), by which the appellant has been convicted for
offences under Sections 456 of IPC and Section 5(J)(ii), 1/6 of
POCSO Act read with Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and sentenced to
(2 of 3) [SOSA-913/2021]
maximum term of fifteen years.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant
that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. The
prosecutrix has been examined as PW-2. She has not supported
the prosecution case. In her cross-examination, she has stated
that the appellant did not commit any rape upon her. The rape
was committed by some other person of the village named
Dharmendra. PW-6 is mother of the prosecutrix, who has also not
fully supported the prosecution case and she has turned hostile by
the prosecution on certain points. The FSL and medical evidence
also does not connect the appellant with the crime. The appellant
was on bail during trial. Now, he is in custody. He has already
served one year and two months of sentence. The prosecutrix has
also stated in her statement that the compromise has been
effected with the appellant. Hearing of the appeal may take long
time. Learned counsel for appellant has referred to statement of
PW-2-prosecutrix, PW-6-mother of the prosecutrix and other
prosecution witnesses.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and scanned the
evidence available on record carefully.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for
suspension of sentence.
7. 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.
(3 of 3) [SOSA-913/2021]
8. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is
allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-
appellant Dharmveer @ Dharmu Sahriya Son Of Nengilal shall
remain suspended till disposal of this criminal appeal and he shall
be released on bail, provided the appellant furnishes a personal
bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh) and two sureties of Rs.50,000/-
(Fifty Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
for his appearance in this Court on 03rd January, 2022 and as and
when called upon to do so.
(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J
Sunita/16
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
