Roopa Ram vs State Of Rajasthan

Kuldeep Mathur, J

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

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that the Special Judge, Special Court, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Sirohi (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the trial court’) vide impugned judgment dated 07.02.2019 has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the accused applicant-appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that there is delay of more than 8 months in filing the complaint against the applicant-appellant. It is also submitted that as per the complainant/victim, she was abducted by the applicant-appellant around 7 to 8 months ago form the date of filing of complaint and the applicant-appellant forcibly confined her at various placed in that 7 to 8 months. It is further submitted that it is strange that family members of the complainant/victim has not lodged any missing person report in that 7 to 8 months. It is also submitted that as a matter of fact, the father of the complainant/victim was murdered by one Rawata and the accused applicant-appellant is the near relatives of Rawata, however, both the families are inimical with each other and on account of that enmity, the applicant-appellant has falsely been implicated in this case.

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has invited our attention towards the statements of PW-5 Sariya and argued that from the evidence of this witness, it is clear that the complainant/victim had opportunities to rescue herself from the confinement of the accused applicant-appellant but she did not avail said opportunities and this fact itself is sufficient to so that the allegations levelled against the applicant-appellant are false. It is further submitted that the applicant-appellant is in custody since last more than 5 years and hearing of the appeal filed by him will take time.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the applicant-appellant in this criminal appeal.

Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, having perused the record of the trial court and after taking into consideration of the custody period of the applicant-appellant, we consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused applicant-appellant.

Accordingly, this suspension of sentence application filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 07.02.2019 in Special Case No.26/2018 (76/2017) CIS No.26/2018 against applicant-appellant - Roopa Ram S/o Shri Govaram shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal filed by the applicant-appellant, 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 05.08.2022 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

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

That if the applicant-appellant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

Similarly, if the sureties change their address, 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-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused applicant-appellant was 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.