Allowed

Girraj Banjara S/O Baluram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Jul 2023SOSA/871/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order granting suspension of sentence to appellant convicted under POCSO and IPC pending appeal, conditional on executing a personal bond with sureties for future appearance.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of sentence till disposal of appeal, subject to execution of personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each and appearance conditions.

Girraj Banjara S/O Baluram Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 871/2023 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1368/2023

¶3

Girraj Banjara S/o Baluram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Narsinghpura, Police Station Mothpur, District Baran (Raj) (At Present Confined In District Jail Baran)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Mahla, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order

¶10

10/07/2023

¶11

This application for suspension of sentence is preferred in pending appeal which was admitted for hearing on 31.05.2023 filed aggrieved of order of conviction and sentence dated 04.05.2023 in sessions case No. 59/2020 passed by learned Special Judge, (POCSO Act cases) No.1, Baran whereby the appellant were convicted under Sections 457, 376(3), 506 of IPC & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years, two years, twenty years along with fine respectively.

¶12

Learned counsel for appellant while referring the statement of PW-1 prosecutrix submitted that in her statement she admitted the incident of 03.07.2019 and time was 1:00 a.m. during night but on 04.07.2019 she visited court campus and deposed in Sessions Case no. 67/2019 which was registered on earlier occasion against same appellant. He further referred the statement of this PW-1 recorded on 04.07.2019 as Ex.D/1 wherein this prosecutrix turned hostile and denied the fact that Giriraj

¶13

[SOSA-871/2023]

¶14

(2 of 4)

¶15

kidnapped her and also committed rape with her. He further referred the affidavit Ex. D/2, D/3 executed by this PW-1. He further submitted that this prosecutrix on earlier occasion had registered a case against present appellant wherein she turned hostile and as a result of same, appellant was acquitted by the learned trial court. He further referred the cross-examination of PW-1 to submit that the incident of 03.07.2019 appears to be improbable as at that particular time of incident door was opened and other family members were there in the house. He further submitted that the father of PW-1 was examined as PW-2 but turned hostile and also admitted that on earlier occasion his daughter ran away with present appellant. He further submitted that the date of birth of prosecutrix was not proved as per law and the deposition of PW-7 is not reliable. He further cited overwriting in Ex. P/18 and Ex. P/19 to submit that the date of birth of prosecutrix was not proved as these documents are fabricated documents. He further submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him. At last, he submitted that the learned trial court without any proper reason has arrived at a conclusion of conviction, though there was no ground to convict present appellant.

¶16

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record.

¶17

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

¶18

As per PW-1 the incident was of night of 03.07.2019 and 04.07.2019 she visited court campus at Baran but deposed in old

¶19

[SOSA-871/2023]

¶20

(3 of 4)

¶21

case. The report Ex. P/1 submitted by this PW-1 clearly indicated that on previous occasion a case was also registered by her. The deposition of victim in previous case was exhibited as Ex.D/1 before the trial court wherein on 04.07.2019 she turned hostile and did not depose in favour of prosecution. Further, few more documents were exhibited in defence and at last, the sessions case no. 67/2019 wherein deposition was made on 04.07.2019 present appellant was acquitted from charge under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) of IPC and 5/6 of POCSO Act on 08.04.2022. On record, one of the exhibits was Ex.D/3 and its execution was admitted by PW-1.

¶22

We have considered the entire record and deposition of all witnesses in the matter.

¶23

Considering the entire aspect, it is not possible to express any opinion on the merits of the case, but looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of case and also the fact that appellant was on bail during trial, 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- Girraj Banjara S/o Baluram 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:-

¶24

That he/she/they will appear before the trial

¶25

Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

¶26

[SOSA-871/2023]

¶27

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.

¶28

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

¶29

Misc. Application stands disposed of.

¶30

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶31

CHETNA BEHRANI /26(sosa)

Girraj Banjara S/O Baluram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girraj Banjara S/O Baluram 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

Chhotu Ram @ Manna Ram @ Ganesh Son of Shri Laduram Vs State of Rajasthan

Zahid Ali S/O Shri Intazar Ali, Vs State of Rajasthan

Kadu S/O Khiladi Vs State of Rajasthan

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