Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suraj Sarota @ Sohit vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 August, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Application (Suspension of Sentence)
No.740/2023
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1296/2023
Suraj Sarota @ Sohit S/o Sukhdev Singh @ Sukha, Aged About
27 Years, R/o Ward No. 6, Near Kodiyo Wali Puli, Near Shivalya
Mandir, Purani Aabadi, Police Station Purani Aabadi, Sri
Ganganagar, Raj. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri
Ganganagar)
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Sunena D/o Shri Bintu Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Ward No. 5, Near Musalman Kabristan, Purani Aabadi, Sri
Ganganagar, Raj.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.R. Godara
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, GA-cum-PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
18/08/2023
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated
09.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act
Cases No.2, Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.178/2021
whereby he was convicted and sentenced as under:-
Offence under which Substantive Fine and default sentence
convicted sentence
Section 363IPC 5 Years' RI Fine of Rs.5,000/- and in
default of payment of fine, to
further undergo 6 months
RI
(2 of 4) [740SOSA1296/2023]
Section 366 IPC 5 Years' RI Fine of Rs.5,000/- and in
default of payment of fine, to
further undergo 6 months
RI
Section 5(L)/6 of the 10 Years RI Fine of Rs.50,000/- and in
POCSO Act default of payment of fine, to
further undergo 6 months
RI
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the
period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original
imprisonment.
2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned
trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual
aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous
conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be
appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court. He
is in custody since his arrest; 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 on behalf of 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 of learned counsel for the
parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of
the case, more particularly that the statement of victim 'C' P.W. 2.
The manner of her deposition in examination-in-chief and the
replies given by her in cross-examination revealing that she was
(3 of 4) [740SOSA1296/2023]
married to one Kalu @ Ajay, probably against her wishes because
she wanted to marry with the appellant; on one occasion she
stated that she wanted to marry the appellant but she was
forcefully married with Ajay however, marital bond with him could
not be subsisted and divorce has been taken place between them
two years ago; looking to the discrepancy with regard to her age
and the words oozing from the scribed statements as also the fact
that appellant-applicant is behind the bars since his arrest, he has
a strong arguable case; hearing of appeal is likely to take further
more time and considering the overall submissions 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 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
sentence passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases No.2,
Sri Ganganagar who passed the impugned order dated 09.06.2023
in Sessions Case No. 178/2021 (CIS No.169/2018) against the
appellant-applicant Suraj Sarota @ Sohit S/o Sukhdev Singh
@ Sukha 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 22.09.2023 and whenever
(4 of 4) [740SOSA1296/2023]
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 addresses, they
will give in writing their changed address to the trial
Court.
7. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicant was 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 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
284-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
