Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vasudev vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 December, 2022
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence
No.1205/2022
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2016/2022
Vasudev S/o Shri Hari Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Sri Balaji,
Police Station Sri Balaji, District Nagaur. (Confined In District
Jail, Nagaur)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kan Singh Oad
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
16/12/2022
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned public
prosecutor on application seeking suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that
there is no material on record to show with certainty that the
prosecutrix was below the age of 18 years at the relevant point of
time. Neither any school record nor any birth certificate from
Village Panchayat or Statistic Department are placed on record.
The ossification test was conducted at the JNA Vyas Hospital,
Nagaur which is on record as Exhibit P-2, a perusal of which
reveals that that as per the estimated radiological age, she was
within 16-18 years, thus, he submits that in view of judgment
passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Jaya Mal
vs. Home Secretary, Government of Jammu & Kashmir and
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-1205/2022]
Ors. AIR 1982 SC 1297 and Birad Mal Singhvi vs. Anand
Purohit AIR 1988 SC 1793, there may be variance of 2 years in
the opinion of the doctor and thus the prosecution has miserably
failed to prove the fact that at time of incident, prosecutrix was
below the age of 18 years. The prosecutrix has made several
improvements after lodging of the FIR, thus, no reliance can be
placed upon her sole testimony. The appellant was on bail during
the entire course of trial. Therefore, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the accused-
appellant may be suspended as the hearing of the appeal may
take long time to conclude.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the accused-
appellant for suspending the sentences.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases,
Nagaur vide judgment dated 22.11.2022 in Sessions Case
No.27/2022 (05/2022) against the applicant/appellant Vasudev
S/o Shri Hari Ram shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he
executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two
sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this Court on 16.01.2023 and
whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the
conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial
Court in the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-1205/2022]
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as
well as to the counsel in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-applicant(s) was/were tried and convicted. A copy of this
order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal
Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose
relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In
case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial
court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High
Court for cancellation of bail.
(FARJAND ALI),J
9-Anshul/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
