High CourtsSingle Bench

Ganesh Tamang vs State Of Sikkim

Sikkim High Court · Decided on 8 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 SIK CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 389(1), 389(3)(i) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 8
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Interim Application No. 01 Of 2023 In Criminal Appeal No. 10 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 375 words

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J

1.

I have heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant on I.A. No.01 of 2023, which is an application filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, the “Cr.P.C.”), seeking suspension of the execution of the Judgment, dated 10-03-2023 and Order on Sentence, dated 13-03-2023, of the Court of Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), Gangtok, in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.37 of 2019 and grant of bail.

2.

The Learned Trial Court after convicting the Appellant under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment of three years, heard the Appellant under Section 389(3)(i) of the Cr.P.C. Petition filed by the Convict/Appellant requesting that he be released on bail, to enable him to file an Appeal, before this High Court. Accordingly, vide Order of the Learned Trial Court, dated 13-03-2023, the Appellant was allowed to remain on bail for two months to enable him to file an Appeal. The two months bail period expired on 12-05-2023. On 11-05-2023, the Petition and the application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. were filed before this Court and thereafter on curing of defects it was re-submitted only on 29-05-2023 much later than the two months period granted by the Learned Trial Court. Hence, the Appellant was to have been in custody from 12-05-2023 but Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the Appellant is still at large and has not been taken into custody in clear violation of the Order of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), Gangtok.

3.

The submissions of the Learned Public Prosecutor for the State-Respondent and those of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant are taken into consideration, whereby the facts of the case as detailed above have been brought to light.

4.

In the said circumstance, I am of the considered opinion, that this application deserves no further consideration as the Appellant has clearly flouted the Order of the Learned Trial Court, dated 13-03-2023.

5.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed and disposed of.

6.

The Appellant be taken into custody forthwith. Registry to take necessary steps in this context.

7.

A copy of this Order be sent to the Learned Trial Court, for information.