Allowed

Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/O Shri Dharmender v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Dec 2021SOSA/815/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed suspension of sentence pending disposal of criminal appeal. Appellant, convicted under POCSO and IPC sections, ordered to release on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each until appeal disposal.

Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/O Shri… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (Suspension of Sentence)

¶3

Application No.815/2020

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1082/2020

¶6

Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/o Shri Dharmender, R/o Amarpura Khurd, PS Singhana, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. At Present In District Jail, Jhunjhunu

¶7

----Accused-Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shailender Singh Balwada For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS

¶13

Order

¶14

15/12/2021

¶15

Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

¶16

The appellant has filed the appeal along with application for suspension of sentence.

¶17

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment/order of conviction dated 02.07.2020 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No.25/2019 (CIS No.25/2019), by which the appellant has been convicted under Sections 366 r/w 366A of IPC and Section 376 of IPC r/w 3/4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

to maximum term of seven years.

¶20

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. Statement of prosecutrix does not inspire confidence, even the trial court has come to the conclusion that there is no evidence on record to suggest that the offence was committed by force. Age of the prosecutrix is between seventeen to eighteen years. The appellant has been sentenced to a maximum term of seven years of sentence, out of which he has already served two years and seven months of sentence. There are material contradictions and infirmities in the prosecution evidence. The prosecutrix went with the appellant on her own free will and despite being in public places during her journey and stay, she did not raise any protest against the appellant. Hearing of appeal may take long time.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties and scanned the evidence available on record carefully.

¶23

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, overall facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting upon detailed merits of the case, this Court deems just and proper to allow the application for suspension of sentence.

¶24

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded to accusedappellant Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/o Shri Dharmender shall remain suspended till disposal of this criminal appeal and he

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

be released on bail, provided the appellant furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance in this Court on 17^th January, 2022 and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J

¶28

Hemant/47

Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/O Shri Dharmender v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyender @ Pintu @ Mintu S/O Shri Dharmender 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

Arti Rupani Wife of Shri Ashok Rupani D/O Shri Kishan Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Nitesh Rohila S/O Shri Om Prakash B/C Darji Vs Ritu Tank W/O Shri Nitesh Rohila D/O Shri Baldev Prasad B/C Darji

Gyan Singh S/O Mohar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramjeevan S/O Shri Late Sohan Lal B/C Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Shailendra Kumar Son of Mahesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramrai @ Rairam @ Rajaram S/O Shyogi Ram Vs State of Rajasthan