Allowed

Trilok Singh S/O Shri Bheru Singh B/C Rawat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Nov 2018SOSA/1374/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a suspension of sentence application pending another appeal. The court found a prima facie case for suspension due to delays in FIR registration and absence of corroborative evidence regarding recent intercourse, leading to the order of the appellant's release on bail with a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Sentence awarded in Sessions Case No. 26/2018 shall remain suspended; appellant released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount.

Trilok Singh S/O Shri Bheru Singh B/C… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application No.

¶3

1374/2018

¶4

¶5

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 367/2018

¶6

Trilok Singh S/o Shri Bheru Singh B/c Rawat, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Kakrol Deval Fatehpur Police Station Tata Garh, District Ajmer, Raj. (At Present Confined At Central Jail, Ajmer).

¶7

----Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sisodia, Public Prosecutor

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶13

Order

¶14

19/11/2018

¶15

Heard on the application for suspension of sentence.

¶16

Learned counsel submits that applicant has been convicted for offence under Section 376 (2) (N) (I) IPC apart from Section 363 and 366-A IPC and for offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The accused has been sentenced with life imprisonment for offence under Section 376 (2) (N) (I) IPC and also for offence under POCSO Act.

¶17

It is stated that incidence said to have taken place between 27.08.2016 to 30.08.2016 but a report for it was made on 08.09.2016. No reason for delay has been given. It is more so when the prosecutrix returned on 31.08.2016. It is also stated

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[SOS-1374/2018]

¶20

that on 03.09.2016, a report was made against the appellant for the offence under Arms Act. The accused said to have given threatening to the complainant for taking away her daughter but, therein, no allegation for offence under Section 363, 366-A and 376 (2) (N) (I) IPC and POCSO Act was made. It is with an after thought that a report was thereupon made on 08.09.2016 for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 (2) (N) (I) IPC apart from POCSO Act.

¶21

A reference of medical report has also been given, which shows no mark of recent intercourse so as to corroborate other evidence produced by the prosecution. The prayer is accordingly to accept the application for suspension of sentence as hearing of appeal is likely to take time.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. He submits that prosecutrix was at the age of 16 years at the time of occurrence. She has made allegation against the appellant for commission of the offence. The prayer is to dismiss the application. It is more so when the appellant was not on bail during trial.

¶23

We have considered rival submissions of parties and perused the record.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant has given facts of this case to show false implication of the appellant. At this stage, any comment may cause prejuduice to either of the parties, thus, we are not commenting on the facts of the case but taking into consideration the evidence available on record and after going through the record, we find that a case for suspension of sentence is made out.

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[SOS-1374/2018]

¶27

Accordingly, application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that sentence awarded to accused-appellant Trilok Singh S/o Shri Bheru Singh by learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, Ajmer in Sessions Case No. 26/2018 (57/2016) shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal and he be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this court on 19.12.2018 and whenever called upon to do so.

¶28

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J

¶29

(M.N. BHANDARI),J

¶30

S. Kumawat/17

Trilok Singh S/O Shri Bheru Singh B/C Rawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Trilok Singh S/O Shri Bheru Singh B/C Rawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalulal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Balveer @ Balli S/O Hoti Lal B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Keshanti W/O Shri Chhuttan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangli Devi Wife of Shri Radheyshyam Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagirath S/O Shri Ramswroop B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Home

Anita Kanwar W/O Bhagirath Singh Vs State of Rajasthan