Madan Lal vs State of Rajasthan

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material on record.

The appellant applicant herein stands convicted for the offence under Section 363, 366, 376 and 344/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act vide judgment dated 23.01.2016 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases (Sessions Judge), Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.57/2014.

Learned counsel Shri Bhati submits that the appellant is in custody from 02.06.2014. The appeal has not been listed for hearing even once. He urges that there exist grave discrepancies in the prosecution evidence regarding the age of the victim and the possibility of her being a major person on the date of the incident cannot be ruled out. He contends that if the victim is considered to be a major girl then, apparently, the case is of consensual relations and thus, as per him, the appellant has strong grounds to challenge the impugned judgment. He thus prays that the sentences awarded to the applicant-appellant deserve to be suspended during pendency of the appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel and contended that no change in circumstance has occasioned after rejection of the previous two applications for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the applicant-appellant.

I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at Bar and have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the record.

True it is that this is a third application for suspension of sentences but, this Court cannot loose sight of the fact that the appellant herein is in custody since 02.06.2014. The appeal has not been listed for hearing even once.

In this background, and considering the discrepancy regarding the age of the victim as reflected from the evidence available on record, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the applicant appellant.

Accordingly, the third application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases (Sessions Judge), Rajsamand, vide judgment dated 23.01.2016 in Sessions Case No.57/2014 against the appellant-applicant Madan 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 04.03.2020 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.