PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned public prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence and perused the judgment impugned dtd. 16/5/2022 passed by Learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act 2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights 2005 No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan First in Sessions Case No. 49/2020 whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 366 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of five years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.50,000.00; under Sec. 323 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of one year simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs.500.00, under Sec. 341 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of one month simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs.300.00 as well as under Sec. 376 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of ten years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1,00,000.00.

(2.) Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that the appellant is innocent. He has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated by the complainant due to personal vengeance. In order to buttress his submission, it is contended that the prosecutrix is a 21 years old major and educated lady but the matter was not reported promptly to the police. In her written report Ex.P1, it is alleged that accused abducted her and made an attempt to molest her but subsequent thereto, she made significant and material improvement and alleged that she was subjected to rape. In this view of the matter, learned counsel further submits that the infirmity appearing in her testimony makes her an unreliable witness. It is asserted that though the conclusion can be based on the statement of solitary witness but at the same time, it is the requirement of law that the evidence of solitary witness must be of sterling-worth and the material produced in this regard must be of impeccable quality and the same should be free from every impeachment. The appellant has strenuously argued that there is hope of success in appeal but the same would likely to take a long time and pending appeal, keeping him behind the bars would surely jeopardize the rights of the accused. He was on bail during the entire course of the trial but the liberty was never misused. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant for releasing the appellant on bail.