Gopal @ Veer Meghwal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7200 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7200 Raj
Judgement Date : 14 September, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Gopal @ Veer Meghwal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 14 September, 2023

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2023:RJ-JD:29649]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 460/2023

Gopal @ Veer Meghwal S/o Horam Meghwal, Aged About 24 Years, Nangavali, Thana Mangalwad, Dist. Chittorgarh (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Manisha Ahir D/o Ramesh @ Rameshwar, Morvan, P.s.

         Mangalwad,        Dist.     Chittorgarh          Through     Her    Father
         Rameshwar Lal
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Shree Kant Verma
                                   Mr. Anil Gupta
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, P.P.



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                       Order

14/09/2023

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

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

25.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge POCSO Act Cases

No.2, Chittorgarh in Special Sessions Case No.189/2018 whereby

he was convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment of ten

years' rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.35,000/-

under Section 376(2)(I) of IPC.

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

[2023:RJ-JD:29649] (2 of 4) [SOSA-460/2023]

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.

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. Though, The victim P.W.-1 (M) alleges that on the date of

incident, the appellant barged into her house and committed rape

upon her and their obscene photographs were taken. Whereafter,

on the account of doing the photo viral, she was subjected to

rape. As a matter of fact, the FIR Ex.-P/1 got lodged after six

months of the incident and no satisfactory explanation has been

furnished except the evasive and bald threat of doing the photo

viral. Though after investigation, no photographs and any obscene

or lascivious material were collected during investigation. There

are serious discrepancies and major contradictions in her

statement recorded in between during trial and during

investigation. Thus, the submission made by the learned counsel

for petitioner seems to be worth considering that there may be

consensual sexual relationship between the two.

6. As far as the question of age of the victim is concerned,

neither the victim nor her mother P.W.-5 (Dhapu Bai) has deposed

about her birth or date of birth. The father of the Victim Ramesh

Kumar @ Rameshwar has not been produced by the prosecution.

[2023:RJ-JD:29649] (3 of 4) [SOSA-460/2023]

Now, the evidence of the prosecution rests upon the testimony of

P.W.-4 Deendayal Berwa. The girl got admitted in the school in the

year 2014, but nowhere in his testimony (P.W.-4) asserts that the

form was filled before him or submitted before him and thus, he

was not the man before whom the admission form was submitted.

The person who took the victim for the purpose of admission has

not been examined in the trial. No birth certificate from

Grampanchayat or Statistics Department has been produced.

Thus, the submission that Ex.-P/8 is not a sacrosanct piece of

evidence and considering the fact that the appellant is behind the

bars since last five years out of the total sentence of ten years. I

see no compelling reasons to allow his further incarceration as

well as considering that the 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.

7. 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,

Chittorgarh who passed the impugned order dated 25.04.2023 in

Special Sessions Case No.189/2018 against the appellant-

applicant- Gopal @ Veer Meghwal S/o Horam Meghwal shall

remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he

shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond in

[2023:RJ-JD:29649] (4 of 4) [SOSA-460/2023]

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 16.10.2023 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.