Nanu Singh vs State Of Rajasthan

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentences.

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that she does not want to file reply to the application for suspension of sentences.

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. It is argued that as a matter of fact, appellant-applicant and the prosecutrix (PW-1) were in relation for quite some time, however, when the family members of the prosecutrix (PW-1) have not approved their relationship, both of them decided to commit suicide by consuming poison together. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has argued that the narration of facts made by the prosecutrix regarding the incident are not at all believable because it is difficult to comprehend that the appellant-applicant had forcibly took the prosecutrix away on a motorcycle at a distant place and, thereafter, sexually assaulted and administered poison to her. It is further argued that no definite evidence regarding the age of the prosecutrix has been produced by the prosecution and the trial court has grossly erred in treating her as minor at the time of incident. It is also submitted that the appellant-applicant is in custody from 22.9.2014, as such, he has served sentence of more than 6½ years and there is no possibility of final hearing of the appeal preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant in near future.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentences.

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case; substantial grounds taken in the appeal, this Court is of the opinion that there are strong grounds for challenging the judgment of conviction, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant-applicant.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences is allowed and it is directed that the sentences awarded to appellant-applicant - Nanu Singh @ Shakti S/o Shri Sukhdev Singh by the Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, Ajmer vide judgment dated 14.11.2017 in Sessions Case No.06/2017 (191/2014) shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal provided he executes a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before this Court on 29.10.2021 and whenever called upon to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions inidcated 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(s) 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.