Rajasthan High Court
Peeru Meghwal Son Of Shri Kalu Meghwal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:39459) on 18 September, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:39459]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1397/2023
Peeru Meghwal Son Of Shri Kalu Meghwal, Resident Of Brajraj
Colony, Nayapura At Present At Urmila Shukla Ka Makaan, Khand
Gawadi Police Station Nayapura District Kota (Raj) (At Present
Confined In District Jail Kota)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
18/09/2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and
learned State counsel on the application for suspension of
execution of sentence. Perused the material available on record.
2. The applicant-appellant herein h as been convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 376 & 384 of IPC and Sections
5(L)(N)/6 & 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act
vide judgment dated 17.08.2023 passed by learned Special Judge,
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Cases & Commission
for Protection of Children Rights Act Cases, No.5, Kota (Raj.) in
Special Sessions Case No. 24/2021 (CIS No.57/2021) and has
been sentenced to maximum punishment of twenty years.
[2024:RJ-JP:39459] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1397/2023]
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 allegations of the victim are not supported
by the medical evidence as no sign of sexual violence was found
on the body of the victim. Counsel submits that FSL as well as
DNA reports do not support the allegations of the victim. Counsel
submits that during trial, appellant-applicant was on bail and he
did not misuse the bail. He further submits that 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 appellant is the step-
father of the victim and allegations levelled by the victim against
the appellant are supported by her mother, who is the wife of the
appellant-applicant. He further 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
especially the fact that the victim, who is none other than his
step-daughter, in her court testimony clearly levelled allegations
against the appellant-applicant of commission of rape upon her;
[2024:RJ-JP:39459] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1397/2023]
the allegations levelled by the victim are well supported by
appellant's wife, who was present in the room at the time of
alleged incident, I do not find it a fit case to suspend the sentence
awarded to the applicant-appellant during pendency of the instant
appeal.
6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of execution of
sentence of dismissed.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
LALIT MOHAN /67
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
