Two-judge Bench dismissed a suspension of sentence application pending an appeal by an accused-appellant in a rape case, noting the prosecutrix was a minor and the case was still under trial.
Application for suspension of sentence dismissed; Paper book submission directed to expedite appeal hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence No.844/2018
In
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 248/2018
Kalu Singh S/o Shri Kailash Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Diggi Ka Badiya, Hanutiya Police Station Bijaynagar, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through P.p., Jaipur
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Asgar Khan For Respondent(s) : Ms.Sonia Shandilya, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH CHANDRA SOMANI
Order
20/09/2018
Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence.
It is stated that the accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in the case, that too, by lodging the FIR with delay. The trial Court has ignored the marriage certificate produced in defence to show that prosecutrix was none else but the wife of the accused-appellant thus allegation for commissioning of rape does not arise. For that reason only, medical report does not support the allegations. The prayer is accordingly to suspend the sentence of the accused-appellant.
(2 of 2)
[SOSA - 844/2018]
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is submitted that prosecutrix was minor at the time of occurrence thus consent carries no meaning. The prosecutrix has made specific allegation against the accusedappellant for commissioning of the offence. In view of the above and looking to the connecting evidence, the application for suspension of sentence may not be accepted.
We have considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The Prosecutrix is minor and has made statement against the accused-appellant. The argument in regard to consent remains of no significance. It is also a fact that prosecutrix was recovered from the residence of the accused-appellant. It is on receipt of telephone call given at the instance of prosecutrix showing harassment by the accused-appellant. There are other evidence but at this stage, we would not like to comment much on it, as it may cause prejudice while arguing the appeal finally, however, taking into consideration that the accused-appellant was not on bail during trial, the application for suspension of sentence is dismissed.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant is directed to submit the paper book so that hearing of the appeal may be expedited.
(DINESH CHANDRA SOMANI),J
(M.N. BHANDARI),J
Preeti/15
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal appeal should be expedited pending hearing.
Kalu Singh
State Of Rajasthan
Munishwar Nath Bhandari
Dinesh Chandra Somani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
