Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there was a dispute between the appellant and the complainant in respect of some amount which the claimant was claiming from him in lieu of the services rendered by him but when the dispute aggravated, he, upon instigation by other rival person, made a false complaint. There is major contradiction and discrepancy in the case which goes to the root of the case and makes the entire story of the prosecution highly suspicious. It is submitted that the FIR came to be lodged after five years of the incident but no explanation has been furnished in this regard, thus, possibility of false implication and embellishment cannot be ruled out. He further submits that even in the belatedly filed FIR, he states that after pursuing the daily routine cause he went to the Government Hospital park to have a slumber in the night. The accused appellant made him to take some contaminated powder under the influence of which he went into an inebriated condition and in the wee hours, around 2am in the night, he was subjected to sodomy. On the contrary, when he was examined under Section 164 Cr.P.C., he set up a very different story according to which he was intoxicated and was made to smoke a puff of beedi (cigarette). When he was examined in the trial, he made further improvements and therefore, it would not be safe to convict a person on the basis of such incredible evidence. The trial is likely to take long time to conclude. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted.
