Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Harish Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 April, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2023/RJJD/011726]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 269/2023
Harish Kumar S/o Shri Khem Ram Meena, Aged About 19 Years,
B/c Meena, Resident Of Village Modi, P.s. Kheroda, District
Udaipur (Rajasthan). (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Nani W/o Lal Chand Meena, resident of Village
Dhavadiya, Fala-Kerpura, P.S. Kheroda, Tehsil-Vallabh Nagar,
District Udaipur (Rajasthan)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
24/04/2023
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated
27.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act
Cases, No.1, Udaipur in Sessions Case No.37/2022 (CIS
No.71/2022) whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer
maximum imprisonment of 5 years for the offence under Section
10 of the POCSO Act with lesser punishment for the offence under
Section 354 IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the
appellant has nothing to do with the alleged offence. He has not
committed any offence and his name has falsely been dragged
into the matter owing to personal vengeance. To bolster his
submission, it is submitted that neither the victim mentioned his
name in her previous statement nor the same was taken during
[2023/RJJD/011726] (2 of 3) [SOSA-269/2023]
trial when she was examined as P.W.4. He drew the attention of
this court towards the note appended on the statement, wherein
the Presiding Officer of the court has categorically mentioned the
fact that when the photograph of the appellant was shown to the
victim on a monitor, she failed to identify him. In her cross-
examination, she candidly admitted the fact that she was in deep
slumber and therefore, she could not identify the person, who
tried to outrage her modesty. The appellant was on bail during
trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to him; hearing of
the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the application for
suspension of sentence may be granted.
3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-
applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension
of sentence.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
5. Considering the submissions advanced at bar, grounds raised in
the memo of appeal and looking to the totality of facts and
circumstances of the case, while refraining from passing any
comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the
prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of
the appeal, this court is of the opinion that the appellant has a
strong arguable case and the hearing of the appeal is likely to take
time, thus, it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to
the accused-appellant.
6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
[2023/RJJD/011726] (3 of 3) [SOSA-269/2023]
sentence passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases,
No.1, Udaipur in Sessions Case No.37/2022 (CIS No.71/2022)
against the appellant-applicant Harish Kumar S/o Khem Raj Meena
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.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/-
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his
appearance in this court on 25.05.2023 and whenever ordered to
do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month
of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he
will give in writing his 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.
(FARJAND ALI),J
160-Pramod/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
