Allowed

Sanjay Dhanuk S/O Shivcharan, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC29 Jan 2024SOSA/7/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a suspension of sentence application, the High Court allowed the sentencing for rape/POCSO offenses to remain suspended during the appeal due to the accused's acquittal on ancillary charges, granting bail for his appearance if convicted.

What did the court decide?

The sentence under IPC Section 363 is suspended pending the disposal of the appeal; the accused is released on bail with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Sanjay Dhanuk S/O Shivcharan, Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:4639]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 7/2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 20/2024

¶6

Sanjay Dhanuk S/o Shivcharan, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Ramgarh, Police Station- Kishanganj, District-Baran At PresentDhanwada Jhalawar, Police Station- Kotwali Jhalawar, DistrictJhalawar (Raj.)

¶7

----Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rajveer SinghJhala
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. DeshrajGosingha, PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶13

Order

¶14

29/01/2024

¶15

This Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application is preferred against the judgment dated 18.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and Child Right Protection Commission Act, 2005, No.1, Jhalawar in Sessions Criminal Case No.64/2022 (CIS No.154/2022), whereby, the accused-applicant Sanjay Dhanuk was convicted as under:-

¶16

Offence under	Imprisonment	Fine	Sentence in
Section			default of fine
363 of IPC	3years’ R.I.	Rs.5,000/-	3 months’ S.I.

¶17

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been wrongly convicted under Section 363

[2024:RJ-JP:4639]

[SOSA-7/2024]

(2 of 3)

of IPC and sentenced for 3 years’ imprisonment with the fine of Rs.5,000/-. He also argues that the trial Court has acquitted the accused-applicant under Sections 354, 354 A and 456 of IPC along with Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and during course of the trial the accused-applicant was on regular bail and never breached the conditions of the bail. He further argues that listing of the appeal may take considerable time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the application for suspension of sentence.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence.

¶24

Considering the argument raised by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the trial Court has acquitted the accusedapplicant under Sections 354, 354 A and 456 of IPC along with Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and having regard to the facts and circumstances as available on the record, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-applicant during pendency of the appeal.

¶25

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 the Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and Child Right Protection Commission Act, 2005, No.1, Jhalawar vide judgment dated 18.12.2023 in Sessions Case No.64/2022 (CIS No.154/2022), against the accused-applicant Sanjay Dhanuk S/o Shivcharan, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of

[2024:RJ-JP:4639]

[SOSA-7/2024]

(3 of 3)

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 27.02.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

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 accusedapplicant 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.

¶34

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶35

AARZOO ARORA /74

Sanjay Dhanuk S/O Shivcharan, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Dhanuk S/O Shivcharan, 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

Ankit Kumar S/O Duli Chand, Vs State of Rajasthan

Baldev Son of Pratap Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Vidya Devi Wife of Hargopal Vs State of Rajasthan

Pappu Khan Son of Pappal Khan, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Sharma S/O Shankar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhim Singh Shekhawat S/O Mohan Singh Shekhawat Vs Dwarka Prasad Vijay S/O Late Sh. Phoolchand Vijay