Suraj Pal Singh vs State of U.P.

Kant Tripathi, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned A.G.A. and perused the impugned judgment and order dated 9.8.2011, rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Bareilly, in session trial No. 528/2007, State v. Suraj Pal Singh and Ors.

Admit.

Summon the lower court record.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the maximum sentence imposed on the Appellant is of 3 years rigorous imprisonment. It was next submitted that the Appellant was on bail during the trial and never abused the same and is presently in jail from 9.8.2011 and if he is not released on bail, the appeal would, in due course, become infructuous as there is no hope of an early hearing of the appeal due to heavy dockets. It was further submitted that the prosecutrix was found aged about 19 years on medical examination, therefore, she was major. It is alleged that the Appellant took the prosecutrix on his motor cycle and handed over to his son with whom the prosecutrix lived for about 15 days and travelled to different places. It was next submitted that the prosecutrix did not raise any alarm or any resistance during the period she travelled on the motor cycle of the Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submitted that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the statement of the prosecutrix that she had been forcibly abducted and subjected to rape could not be relied on.

It was next submitted that in the case of Shyam and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra 1995 SCC (Crl) 851 , the Apex Court found the prosecutrix as a consenting party in the similar circumstances. While reiterating this principle, the Apex Court in the case of Krishan Kumar Malik Vs. State of Haryana, found that the prosecutrix had travelled certain distance in the Maruti Van after her alleged abduction but did not raise any alarm for help and, therefore, it was held that her evidence was shaky and untrustworthy.

In my opinion, prima facie, the aforesaid submissions of the learned Counsel for the Appellant have substance, therefore, it is just and expedient to exercise the discretion in favour of the Appellant.

Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned AGA, the Appellant Suraj Pal Singh, who has been convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid session trial, is released on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

The realisation of half of the fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal, provided the Appellant deposits half of the fine within one month.

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bond, the lower court shall transmit photo state copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of thisappeal.

Let the paper books be prepared.

List the appeal for final hearing in due course.