Karnail Singh vs State

Heard learned counsel for the applicant appellant and learned Public Prosecutor on application for suspension of sentences.

Shri J.S. Choudhary, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pradeep Choudhary, Advocate representing the applicant-appellant vehemently and fervently urged that the entire case of the prosecution is false and fabricated. The prosecutrix Mst. 'B' is a married lady aged about 26 years having two children. The alleged incident of rape took place on 03.09.2017 in the afternoon at about 4 O' Clock. The prosecutrix did not make a complaint of the incident to any one including her husband. She tried to end her life by consuming poison on the next to the incident. The FIR came to be lodged after nearly seven days. He urges that this fact in itself is sufficient to show that the husband of the prosecutrix must have come to know of her extramarital fling and thus, he must have rebuked the prosecutrix as a result whereof, she tried to end her life by consuming poison. He thus, urges that the accused appellant, who has been in custody for the last more than 2 years, deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of the appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that the FIR came to be lodged after significant delay.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances as available on record and the rank silence of the prosecutrix in disclosing about the alleged incident even to her husband and the fact that without any rhyme or reason, she consumed poison on the day after the incident, does give rise to a suspicion that the relationship between her and the accused appellant might have been consensual. The appellant has remained in custody for more than two years. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time.

Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at bar and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as available on record, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the accused appellant.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the Addiitional Sessions Judge, Sangaria, District Hanumangarh, vide judgment dated 29.06.2019 in Sessions Case No.04/2018 against the appellant-applicant Karnail Singh, 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 13.01.2020 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

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

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.

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

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.