High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajkumar Oraon vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 3 September 2021 · Citation: (2021) 09 JH CK 0007

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajesh Shankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 389(1), 389(2) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 8 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376, 511
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.1397 Of 2018
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

9 paragraphs · 403 words

Rajesh Shankar, J

The present criminal appeal is taken up today through Video conferencing.

I.A. No.3513 of 2021

The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 389(1) & (2) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence awarded to the appellant vide order dated 6th August, 2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in connection with POCSO Case No.04 of 2018 and his release on bail during pendency of the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that earlier similar application of the appellant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 21st February, 2019 passed in I.A. No.297 of 2019. The appellant has renewed his prayer for suspension of sentence awarded to him by the learned Trial Court, primarily on the ground that out of maximum sentence of seven years awarded to him by learned Trial Court, he has already undergone more than half of the sentence. It has been stated in paragraph 10 of the present interlocutory application that the appellant was taken into judicial custody on 2nd January, 2018 and was never released till conviction and awarding of the sentence. It is also submitted that the learned Trial Court has committed error in convicting the appellant under Section 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act as well as under Section 376 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code. At least considering the fact that the appellant has already undergone more than half of the sentence, the same may be suspended during pendency of the present appeal.

Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P. though opposes the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant on merit, yet he accepts the fact that the appellant has already undergone more than half of the sentence awarded to him by the learned Trial Court.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in connection with POCSO Case No.04 of 2018 during pendency of the present appeal.

Accordingly, the appellant above named, is directed to be released on bail, during the pendency of the present appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in connection with POCSO Case No.04 of 2018.

The present interlocutory application stands disposed of.