Allowed

Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/O Hariprakash v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Apr 2024SOSA/578/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension of Sentence Application allowed. The High Court suspended the sentence awarded in POCSO and IPC cases pending disposal of an appeal, subject to bail conditions including fine deposit, personal bond, and attendance obligations.

What did the court decide?

Suspended sentence awarded in Sessions Case pending appeal disposal; released on bail subject to depositing fine, executing personal bond with sureties, and appearing before trial court annually.

Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/O Hariprakash Vs State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.

¶3

578/2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 687/2024

¶6

Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/o Hariprakash, aged about 26 Years, R/o Near Govt. Hand Pump Pandeya Wali Gali Purohit Ji Ki Tapri P.S. Railway Colony Kota City (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota)

¶7

----Accused- Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma-PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶13

Order

¶14

05/04/2024

¶15

Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and under Sections 457 and 354 of IPC. Counsel submits that maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is three years. Counsel submits that initially the petitioner was granted bail but subsequently on account of his absence, his bail bonds were forfeited and he was taken into custody. Counsel submits that at present the appellant is in custody and the disposal of the appeal is bound to take time, therefore, the sentence of the appellant be suspended till disposal of the appeal.

¶16

[CRLAS-687/2024]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the suspension of sentence application.

¶19

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

¶20

Considering the arguments put forward by the counsel for the appellant and looking to the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is three years and disposal of the appeal is likely to take time, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accusedappellant.

¶21

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the applicant under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the sentence awarded by the Court of Special Judge POCSO Act, 2012 and Protection of Children Rights Commission Act 2005 No. 2, Kota (Raj.) vide judgment dated 19.03.2024 in Sessions Case No.147/2020 against the appellant Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/o Hariprakash shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit the fine amount, as imposed by the Trial Court and he shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for appearance before this Court on 06.05.2024 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶22

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

¶23

That if the applicant changes the place of residence and mobile number, he will give in writing his changed

¶24

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-687/2024]

¶25

address and mobile number to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶26

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

¶27

Appellant shall deposit a fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court.

¶28

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedappellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶29

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶30

Ashu/20

Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/O Hariprakash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Kumar @ Sonu S/O Hariprakash 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

Bharosi Vs State

Umesh Kumar Vs Renu @ Renuka and Anr.

Devendra @ Pulsar @ Kishnu Son of Shri Amar Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Jitendra S/O Shri Prabhulal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Omprakash S/O Shri Brijmohan Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Kumar S/O Vijay Singh Vs State of Rajasthan