Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 337 (RAJ)

Heera Lal v. State

2020-02-06

SANDEEP MEHTA, VIJAY BISHNOI

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to this application for suspension of sentences and proposes to argue the matter orally. 2. Heard learned counsel representing the applicant appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the impugned judgment and the material available on record. 3. The appellant applicant herein stands convicted for the offences under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act vide judgment dated 23.01.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.20/2018 (CIS No.34/2018) and was sentenced to life imprisonment. 4. Learned counsel Shri Charan urges that the case is of consensual sexual relations between the petitioner and the victim. He further submits that the school documents (Ex.P/24A, Ex.P/25A and Ex.P/26A) relied upon by the learned trial court for coming to a conclusion that the victim was less than 18 years of age on the date of the incident are totally unreliable. He urges that the admission form of the victim indicates that the same was presented by one Ranaram and thereafter, one Lehrilal signed the same. The victim's father Shri Udailal Salvi (PW-1) admitted in his cross-examination that he was married about 45 years ago and all his children were born before 20 years. Thus, as per Shri Charan, the victim was definitely above 18 years of age when the incident took place. He therefore urges that the appellant-applicant has strong grounds so as to challenge the impugned judgment and conviction and he deserves deserves indulgence of bail, during pendency of the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by Shri Charan. Nonetheless, he too is not in a position to reconcile the apparent discrepancy in the prosecution case regarding the age of the victim. If the statement of the victim is seen, apparently elements of a consensual relationship with the appellant are reflected therefrom. 6. In this background, it is considered just and proper to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant, during pendency of the appeal. 7. If the statement of the victim is seen, apparently elements of a consensual relationship with the appellant are reflected therefrom. 6. In this background, it is considered just and proper to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant, during pendency of the appeal. 7. Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Rajsamand, vide judgment dated 23.01.2019 in Sessions Case No.20/2018 (CIS No.34/2018) against the appellant-applicant Heera Lal, 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 06.03.2020 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. 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. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 8. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were 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(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.