Rajasthan High Court
Altaf @ Attu S/O Fariyad Hussain Neelgar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:42158) on 7 October, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:42158]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1070/2021
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1734/2021
Altaf @ Attu S/o Fariyad Hussain Neelgar, Presently Adopted Son
Liyakat Ulla, R/o Garib Nawaj Colony, Bagri Mohalla, Police
Station Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) (At Present
Confined In District Jail Jhalwar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajeet Singh Devanda
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
07/10/2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and
learned State counsel on the application for suspension of
execution of sentence.
2. The applicant-appellant herein h as been convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A & 376(2)(n) of IPC
and Section 5(l)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence
Act, 2012 vide judgment dated 22.09.2021 passed by learned
Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act &
and the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, No.2,
Jhalawar (Raj.) in Sessions Case No.39/2018 (284/2018) and has
been sentenced to maximum punishment of twenty years.
[2024:RJ-JP:42158] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1070/2021]
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that
appellant-applicant has wrongly been convicted by the learned
trial Court. Counsel submits that learned trial Court has failed to
appreciate the evidence available on record in correct perspective.
Counsel submits that victim left her parental home on her own
free will and travelled with the appellant in public conveyance and
during this period, no complaint was made by her. It is submitted
that there is no medical corroboration of the allegations levelled
by the victim as no sign of sexual assault was found on the person
of the victim at the time of medical examination. It is submitted
that no cogent evidence is available on record with regard to age
of the victim and her date of birth in school record was entered on
the basis of estimation/speculation. Highlighting the testimony of
father of the victim, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
victim's father showed ignorance with regard to her date of birth
as no supporting documents were produced with regard to her age
at the time of admission in school. Counsel further submits that
appellant has suffered incarceration of about Six years including
remission and there is no immediate prospect of this appeal being
heard and disposed of in near future.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by
counsel for the appellant. He submits that as per school record,
victim was aged about 15 years at the time of alleged incident. He
further submits that victim/complainant of this case has duly been
informed about hearing of this application for suspension of
execution of sentence.
5. Despite information, no one has put in appearance on behalf
[2024:RJ-JP:42158] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1070/2021]
of the complainant.
6. Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf
of counsel for the appellant and learned State Counsel and having
regard to the facts and circumstances as available on the record
and especially the fact that victim left her parental home on her
own free will and remained in the company of the appellant for
sufficient time and during this period she travelled with the
appellant in public conveyance and so also considering the fact
that appellant has suffered incarceration of about Six years and
final adjudication of the present appeal is likely to take time, this
Court is of the opinion that the appellant has available to him
strong grounds to assail the impugned judgment of conviction and
sentence. Thus, it is a fit case for suspending the sentences
awarded to the applicant-appellant during pendency of the instant
appeal.
7. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 of Cr.PC is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act & and the Commission for
Protection of Child Rights Act, No.2, Jhalawar (Raj.) vide judgment
dated 22.09.2021 in Special Sessions Case No.39/2018
(284/2018) against the appellant-applicant Altaf @ Attu S/o
Fariyad Hussain Neelgar shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail,
provided he execute 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 07.11.2024
[2024:RJ-JP:42158] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1070/2021]
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.
8. 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.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
LALIT MOHAN /98
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
