JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. The short question that has cropped up for consideration would be, whether for considering an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail under Section 389(1) of the CrPC, notice to the victim/complainant under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'the POCSO Act') would be necessary as appellant NO.1 has been convicted for offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and appellant No.2 has been convicted for offence under Section 6 read with Section 17 of the POCSO Act in addition to their conviction for offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code.

2. In this appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, application for suspension of their substantive jail sentence has also been preferred by the appellants/accused for suspension of their sentences for offences under the provisions of the IPC as well as under the provisions of the POCSO Act.

3. Mr. Ashish Surana, learned Amicus Curiae, would submit that by Amendment Act No.5 of 2009 and by virtue of the POCSO Rules, 2007, the right created in favour of the victim has to be given fullest effect to and interest of the victim/inf