Allowed

Vijay Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Aug 2023SOSA/495/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur heard an application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. filed by an appellant convicted under PCPO Act. The court suspended the sentence and granted bail subject to conditions, to be decided later.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended till final disposal of appeal; bail granted on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each and other conditions.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 495/2023

¶3

Vijay Kumar S/o Shri Bhagwan Das, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 19 Anoopgarh, Police Station Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. (Presently In Judicial Custody At Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Ram Pratap S/o Khiya Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 18, Anoopgarh, P.s. Anoopgarh, District Ganganagar.

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Siddharth Karwasara
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit,P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶10

Order

¶11

03/08/2023

¶12

The instant application for suspension of sentence has been moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated 12.10.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Special Court, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & Children’s Court under the commissions for Protections of Child Rights Act, 2005 No.1, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.127/2018.

¶13

There are allegation of subjecting a minor to fornication. The girl is below the age of sixteen years. It is revealing that she was also persisting the boy, the appellant herein, to elope with her. The appellant is behind the bars since last eight years and six months and total sentence awarded to him is ten years. If he will earn

¶14

[SOSA-495/2023]

¶15

(2 of 4)

¶16

remission as per the prison rules, then the sentence would be shortened to some extent. The Ground raised in the appeal as well as the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant are required to be considered since being first appellate court and by exercising powers under Section 386 Cr.P.C, it is imperative upon the court of appeal to go through the niceties of the matter. The legal as well as the factual aspect of the matter are required to be appreciated again but there seems no possibility of hearing of the appeal instituted in the year 2023 to be heard and decided in a near period. In this view of the matter, if the period of sentence suffered by the appellant before hearing of the appeal exceeds the sentence awarded, it would and may frustrate the very purpose of filing of the appeal, thus these overwhelming circumstances persuaded this Court to take a lenient view for suspension of the sentence awarded by the trial court till disposal of the appeal.

¶17

Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶19

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and considering the overall submissions while refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of the appeal, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit

¶20

[SOSA-495/2023]

¶21

(3 of 4)

¶22

case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accusedappellant.

¶23

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by learned Special Judge, Special Court, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & Children’s Court under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, No.1, Sriganganagar who passed the impugned order dated 12.10.2021 in Sessions Case No.127/2018 against the appellantapplicant- Vijay Kumar S/o Shri Bhagwan Das shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail provided he 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 04.09.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶24

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

¶25

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶26

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

¶27

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-

¶28

(4 of 4) [SOSA-495/2023]

¶29

applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶30

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶31

46-Taruna/-

Vijay Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar 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

Rumal Vs State of Rajasthan

Chunnilal Vs Dilip Kumar

Heera Lal Vs State

Bhanwari Lal and Anr. Vs State

Amandeep Kaur Vs Jasvinder Singh

R.K. Contractor and Company Vs State of Rajasthan