Summ Mohammed vs State Of Rajasthan

Goverdhan Bardhar, J

Heard learned counsel for the applicant - appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor upon application for suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the applicant - appellant has submitted that the trial Court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the accused - applicant vide impugned judgment. It is argued that from the evidence of complainant PW-2 as well as his minor daughter PW-1, it is clear that the applicant - appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel has submitted that it is an admitted case that the complainant and applicant are neighbors and are sharing electricity connection and tube-well for the purpose of irrigating their fields. Learned counsel has submitted that the allegation against the applicant - appellant of sexually assaulting the daughter of the complainant in between 40 days, when the complainant had gone to attend the 'Jamat'

is not true as the victim has not narrated any such story to the complainant after his return. Learned counsel has also submitted that the allegation of sexual assault upon the applicant - appellant on 6.10.2017 is also false. It is unbelievable that in the daylight applicant - appellant has sexually assaulted the victim though her father was present in nearby another field. Learned counsel has argued that as a matter of fact, it is a case of enmity between the applicant - appellant and the complainant in respect of sharing of water through tube-well and on account of that this false FIR has been lodged. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant - appellant is in custody since 8.12.2017 and the appeal preferred by the appellant against the impugned judgment is not likely to be heard in the near future.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application for suspension of sentence.

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and without making any observation on the merits of the case, we are inclined to suspend the sentence of the applicant.

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and Child Rights Protection Commission Act, 2005) No.4, Alwar, in Sessions Case No.110/2018 vide judgment dated 17.2.2020 against the applicant - Summ Mohammed @ Kallu S/o Shri Deen Mohammed @ Minnu shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid criminal appeal provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance in this Court on 27.10.2021 and subsequently before the trial court on the following conditions:-

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

That if the appellant(s) change the place of residence, he/she/they will give the changed address in writing to the trial court, High Court as well as to his/her/their counsel in the High Court.

Similarly if sureties change his/her/their address, they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial court.

The learned trial court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused appellant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to the Sessions Case in which the accused appellant(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 appellant(s) do/does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.