Allowed

Jagdish Son of Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Jul 2023SOSA/413/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Special Sessions Case No.15/2020, appellant was convicted under POCSO and IPC regarding kidnapping and rape. Aggrieved by conviction, he filed second suspension application. Court allowed suspension of sentence pending appeal custody and personal bond execution.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of Jagdish Son Of Ramlal suspended till disposal of appeal with execution of personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

Jagdish Son of Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. 2^nd (SOS) Application No. 413/2023

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1511/2022

¶5

Jagdish Son Of Ramlal, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Digod Police Station Digod District Kota Rural (At Present Confined At District Jail Kota)

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Laddha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶12

Order

¶13

06/07/2023

¶14

Instant 2^nd application for suspension of sentence is preferred aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 20.07.2022 in Special Sessions Case No.15/2020 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, Cases) No.3, Kota whereby appellant was convicted for charge under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 5(l)/6 POCSO Act.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submits that there is a material contradiction in the statement of prosecution and learned trial court did not consider the same. He further submits that prosecutrix in her statement clearly stated that at her behest appellant accompanied her, therefore, there was no case of kidnapping or rape with

¶16

[SOSA-413/2023]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

prosecutrix. He further challenged the birth record submitted by prosecution, on the ground that no supporting evidence was produced to justify the date of birth. He further referred the statement of PW8 to submit that no injury was reportedly found on body of victim. He further referred the discrepancies in the statement of witnesses and submitted that no case of continuous or repeated penetrative assault was found proved but learned trial court without considering this aspect had convicted appellant. At last he submitted that in cross, this victim had denied that Jagdish had committed anything with her. He further referred the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and other statements recorded by police. At last he submitted that appellant was on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time.

¶19

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor.

¶20

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

¶21

A perusal of record indicated that appellant was released on bail by order dated 01.03.2021 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.1838/2021 wherefore appellant was on bail till pronouncement of judgment. Victim was examined as PW2 before the trial court and prior to that her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded and exhibited as Ex.P7. The report was registered in P.S. Budhadeet on 21.05.2019. There is no doubt about the fact that the age of victim was above 12 years which is less than 16 years. As regard to evidence which is part of record, at this stage we cannot opine on merits of aforesaid deposition. The assertion of victim indicated that present appellant

¶22

[SOSA-413/2023]

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

and victim were good friends though she further admitted many more things during her cross-examination which would be considered while considering the matter on merit but the fact of the matter is that appellant remained on bail for most of the time during trial, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that, therefore second application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. be allowed and sentence of accusedappellant- Jagdish Son Of Ramlal be suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would execute 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:-

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

Misc. Application stands disposed of.

¶29

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶30

Arun/20

Jagdish Son of Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Son of Ramlal 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

Mohd. Rafique Vs State

Shiv Das Vs State

Kailash Singh Sonof Jagmal Singh Rajput Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Rasid@Chochu S/O Surajmal B/C Sakka

Braj Mohan S/O Shri Panchu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Ghanshyam Son of Buddhsingh Vs State of Rajasthan