HITESHBHAI GOVINDBHAI GAJJAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Learned APP Shri Jani wavied service of rule. The applicants seek regular bail pending the conviction appeal. They are convicted for offence under section 377 of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years. This appeal is placed before the Division Bench since the State has also preferred appeal for enhancement of the sentence. At this stage we are however, concerned with the limited question of granting or refusing bail.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. It prima facie, emerges that against the sentence of four years, accused have already been in jail for over a year and half. Further, the complaint was lodged nearly a month after the alleged incident. Besides the version of the complainant prima facie, there is no further corroboration in the form of medical evidence or other supporting eyewitness account. We also noted the version of the complainant and the manner in which the alleged acts were committed. At this stage, when the sentence handed down to the accused by the learned Sessions Judge is of four years, refusing bail would amount to eventually executing the judgement without consideration of appeal. Additionally, we also notice that the accused were relatively young aged about 22/24 years at the time of incident. Under the circumstances, both the accused are ordered to be released on bail pending appeal on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- each with on surety of like-amount on the following conditions :