Imran Sai vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent State.

This appeal is already admitted and the lower court records are on the record.

I.A. No. 7647 of 2024 has been filed for suspension of sentence during pendency of this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been convicted by the judgment dated 23.03.2023 and order of sentence dated 25.03.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sahibganj whereby the learned court has found guilty for offence under section 354 of the IPC and section 10 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and fine of Rs.10,000/- under section 354 IPC and in default thereof convict will further undergo SI for six months and he has been further directed to undergo RI for five years under section 10 of POCSO Act with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof he has been further directed to undergo six months SI and both the sentences will run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been in custody since 3.11.2022 and he has remained in custody for 1 year and 11 months. By way of drawing the attention of the Court to the judgment passed by the learned court the learned counsel for the appellant submits that PW1 is father of the victim and he has not supported the case. He further submits that the PW2 is mother of the victim and she has also not supported the prosecution case. He submits that in the FIR the appellant is named however in the deposition the victim has stated that she has not known the name of the appellant. He further submits that DWs have stated before the learned court in the same line and there is land dispute between the parties and in view of that falsely the appellant has been implicated.

Learned counsel for the respondent State opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that half of the sentence has not been completed by the appellant.

Considering that the appellant is in custody since 3.11.2022 and he has remained in custody for 1 year and 11 months and even father and mother of the victim have not supported the case of the prosecution and this has come in the evidence of the DW1 that there is dispute of land between the parties, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant, during pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, the appellant- Imran Sai, is, hereby, directed to be released on bail, during pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sahibganj, in connection with Borio P.S. Case No.277 of 2022.

I.A. No.7647 of 2024 stands disposed of.