MOSIN KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on applications for suspension of sentence.

(2.) It is contended by counsels for the appellants that there is a delay of two months in lodging of FIR. Prosecutrix has stated that her husband asked to lodge the FIR. It is also contended that P.W. 1-Firoz Khan (husband of prosecutrix) has turned hostile. He has stated that he is not aware of any incident. It is further contended that prosecutrix-P.W. 2 has denied giving statement under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. and Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate. She has also denied that she was shown some obscene photographs or video clippings. It is also contended that prosecutrix has given evidence that she informed her husband about the incident on the same day. However, no FIR was lodged on that day and the FIR was lodged after an inordinate delay of two months. It is further contended that appellants have been acquitted for offence of Ss. 384 and 323 IPC. It is also contended that appellants have remained in custody for a period of about three years.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the applications for suspension of sentence.