Rajasthan High Court
Kishan Lal S/O Shri Roduram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:36807) on 2 September, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:36807]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 47/2023
In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1191/2020
Kishan Lal S/o Shri Roduram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Bada Ki
Dhani, Tan Naurangpura, Police Station Sambhar Lake, Distt.
Jaipur (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Pareek
Ms. Poonam Chand Bhandari
Mr. Rakesh Chandel
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
02/09/2024
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 has been convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 & 376(3) of IPC and
Section 3/4 (2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act,
2012 vide judgment dated 20.07.2020 passed by learned Special
Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012,
District Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 36/2019 and has been
sentenced to maximum punishment of twenty years.
[2024:RJ-JP:36807] (2 of 4) [SOSA-47/2023]
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 entire prosecution case is baseless as it is
not possible for a single person to take away the girl of aged
about 15 years on motorcycle in unconscious position. Counsel
submits that appellant was unknown for the prosecutrix which is
admitted by the prosecutrix in her Court testimony. Counsel
submits that neither test identification parade was conducted nor
in the Court it was stated by the prosecutrix that accused who is
present in the Court committed rape upon her. Counsel submits
that there is no corroboration of the allegations of the prosecutrix
as no sign of sexual assault was found on the person of the
prosecutrix at the time of medical examination and the FSL report
is also of no significance as only human semen was collected on
the undergarments of prosecutrix as well as accused. Counsel
further submits that DNA of the accused-appellant was not found
on the undergarments of prosecutrix. Counsel further submits that
appellant is in custody since 26.05.2019 and as per custody
certificate appellant-applicant has served incarceration of more
than five years including remission. 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 there is the allegation
against the appellant of commission of rape with the prosecutrix
who was aged about 15 years at the time of commission of
[2024:RJ-JP:36807] (3 of 4) [SOSA-47/2023]
incident. He submits that despite information, no one has put in
appearance on behalf of victim/complainant.
5. Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf
of the appellant as well as learned State Counsel and having
regard to the facts and circumstances as available on the record
and considering the contention put-forth by the counsel for the
appellant-applicant and further considering the fact that appellant
has already suffered incarceration of more than five years
including remission and there is no immediate prospect of being
heard and disposal of this appeal near future, 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.
6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, District Jaipur vide
judgment dated 20.07.2020 in Sessions Case No.36/2019 against
the appellant-applicant Kishan Lal S/o Shri Roduram 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 07.10.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the
disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
[2024:RJ-JP:36807] (4 of 4) [SOSA-47/2023]
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 address(s),
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.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
LALIT MOHAN /60
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
