MUNESH 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. 20/10/2022 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2005, No.2, Kota whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 376(3) IPC and Sec. 3/4 of POCSO Act and has been sentenced to maximum 20 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.25,000.00 in default of payment of fine, further undergo RI for six months.

(2.) Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that vehemently submits that a patently false case has been foisted against the appellant with an oblique motive to harass him and this fact can be traced from the record of the case. There is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR which further casts a serious doubt in the genuineness of the story set out by the prosecution and the possibility of embellishment and concoction cannot be ruled out. The incident allegedly took place on 29/3/2020 and that too just near to her house where she was subjected to rape. The manner in which the incident allegedly took place and reported in Ex.P-1 reveals that ample force was put upon her and soon after the incident she had gone to her house where she slept with her family members. On the next day she left her house along with her cousin and went to village Seewali but did not disclose the story to anyone. She had narrated the entire story to her grandmother on the next date and thereafter on 4/4/2020 to her parents, but surprisingly the matter came to be lodged on 9/4/2020. It is fervently contended that large part of the story narrated in the FIR Ex.P-1 and her statement recorded during investigation under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. i.e. Ex.P-7 has not been found reliable by the agency and that is why the accused Manbhar Bai and Yuvraj have been exonerated by the investigating agency itself and the charge-sheet came to be submitted only against the accused appellant. He has strong arguable case in his favour and hearing of appeal will take time and the appellant is behind the bars since 13/4/2020. There are major contradiction in the statements.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant.