Anil vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8955 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:37399]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 702/2023

Anil S/o Bapu Lal @ Babu Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Mandva Navaghara Ps Kotali Dungarpur Dist. Dungarpur (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Dungarpur)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Dola S/o Dula R/o Mandva Kotwali, Dungarpur.

                                                                     ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)            :    Mr. Jitendra Ojha
For Respondent(s)            :    Mr. Gaurav Singh, AGA



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                       Order

02/11/2023

1. Despite service, no one has appeared on behalf of the

respondent No.2.

2. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated

12.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge of POCSO Act,

2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005,

Dungarpur in Sessions Case No.95/2021 whereby he was

convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment of

twenty years' rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of

Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and lesser

punishment for the other offence under Section 376(2) of IPC.

3. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned

trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual

[2023:RJ-JD:37399] (2 of 4) [SOSA-702/2023]

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.

Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the

application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

4. 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.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and and gone through

the record of the case.

6. The victim in this case is said to be below the age of 18

years but the sanctity of the documents produced on behalf of the

prosecution has been vehemently disputed by saying that the

school record is not a sacrosanct piece of evidence unless positive

evidence is laid in the trial which has not been done in this case.

The victim eloped with the appellant on 20.11.2020 which is very

much evident from the facts and circumstances of the case.

Interestingly, till 03.01.2023, no report whatsoever got lodged at

the behest of of her family members which indicates that they

were agreeable with the relationship of the victim with the

appellant. It is only after three or four months, the report came to

be lodged. In this meantime, the appellant and the victim lived

together in a rented house at somewhere in Ahmedabad. When

she was apprehended by the police team, she, in her statement

under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C., candidly admitted that

she was all over a consenting party and she submitted herself

[2023:RJ-JD:37399] (3 of 4) [SOSA-702/2023]

voluntarily before the appellant without there being any force.

Considering, the victim's statement recorded during investigation

and trial this Court does not deem it appropriate to allow

appellant's further incarceration.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of

the case and considering the overall submissions and the facts

that he is behind the bars and hearing of appeal is not seeming

fate in the near future, 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.

8. 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 learned Special Judge of POCSO Act,

2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005,

Dungarpur who passed the impugned order 12.06.2023 in

Sessions Case No.95/2021 against the appellant-applicant- Anil

S/o Bapu Lal @ Babu Lal 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 04.12.2023

and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on

the conditions indicated below:-

[2023:RJ-JD:37399] (4 of 4) [SOSA-702/2023]

(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.

9. 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 84-divya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)