Allowed

Kuldeep Son of Ramdev v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Jul 2023SOSA/275/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan allowed suspension of sentence pending appeal. Appellant convicted under Sections 306 IPC and Sections 11/12 POCSO Act for suicide of deceased boy alleging sexual assault. Court granted bail subject to bond and conditions including appearance at trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application for suspension of sentence allowed; sentence suspended till disposal of appeal subject to personal bond and sureties.

Kuldeep Son of Ramdev Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.275/2023 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 216/2023

¶3

Kuldeep Son Of Ramdev, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Naya Bardha Police Station Taleda District Bundi Rajasthan (At Present Confined In Jail Bundi)

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.L. Nasuna, Dy.GA.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order

¶10

11/07/2023

¶11

This application for suspension of sentence is preferred in pending appeal which was admitted for hearing on 11.07.2023 filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 24.01.2023 in sessions case No.34/2021 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act cases) No.2, Bundi whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 306 IPC & 11/12 of POCSO Act and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years, two years along with fine respectively.

¶12

Learned counsel for appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submits that learned trial court has not properly appreciated the material and evidence on record thereby erroneously convicting the present appellant. He further referred the statement of PW-3 Durgalal, brother of deceased to submit that his brother committed suicide due to continuous sexual assault and teasing of PW-1 by appellant. He further referred the statement of PW-1 victim to submit that no overt act on the part of appellant was proved from evidence of PW-1. He further

¶13

[SOSA-275/2023]

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

submits that after fairly long delay F.I.R. was registered in the matter to falsely implicate the present appellant. He further submits that on earlier occasion, F.I.R. no. 5/2019 was registered against appellant in P.S. Taleda for alleged sexual assault against PW-1. During deposition in aforesaid matter, PW-1 (victim) turned hostile and a copy of this statement was submitted in defence as Ex. D/5. He further submits that as per Ex. D/5 present appellant neither committed any molestation nor rape, therefore, for suicide of father of PW-1 present appellant cannot be held responsible. While referring the ingredients of Sections 306 and 107 IPC, he submits that no ingredient of abetment was proved in the matter. Learned trial court without considering the aforesaid legal position has arrived at a conclusion of conviction which is erroneous and bad in the eye of law. At last, he submits that appellant remained on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. So, he be released on bail

¶16

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

¶18

A perusal of record clearly indicated that appellant was on bail during trial pursuant to order dated 25.05.2021 in S.B. Criminal Misc. third bail application no. 8159/2021. As per record, on report of PW-1 F.I.R. was registered on 22.08.2020 wherein it was alleged that father of PW-1 committed suicide on 25.05.2020, three months prior to lodging of present report it is pertinent to note that another case against present appellant was also registered as F.I.R. no. 5/2019 on 08.01.2019 wherein the charge-

¶19

[SOSA-275/2023]

¶20

(3 of 3)

¶21

sheet was filed against present appellant but PW-1 was examined on 31.07.2019 in sessions case no. 43/2019 and she turned hostile, statement was exhibited as Ex. D/5.

¶22

Having considered the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of merits of the case, I am of the considered view it is appropriate that appellant can be granted the benefit of bail. The application for suspension of sentence of accused- Kuldeep Son Of Ramdev is allowed and sentence is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would executes 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 18.12.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶23

That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

¶24

That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶25

Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

¶26

Misc. Application stands disposed of.

¶27

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶28

CHETNA BEHRANI /59(sosa)

Kuldeep Son of Ramdev v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Son of Ramdev 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omprakash @ Rabundiya S/O Shri Prabhulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Son of Raghuwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Bunkar @ Deepu Son of Shri Dungar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Roshen Vs State

Alok Pareek Son of Late Shri Radheyshyam Pareek Vs Moolchand Yadav Son of Unknown

Ajay Kumar Urf Sonu S/O Shri Bhagawana Ram Vs State of Rajasthan