Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
ILESH J. VORA, SANDEEP N. BHATT, JJ
JAYENDRA S/O SURESHBHAI PARMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
ILESH J. VORA, J.
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.
2. We have heard Mr.Vaibhav Sheth, learned advocate and Mr.Jay Metha, learned APP for the respective parties.
3. By way of this application under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023, applicant – Jayendra S/o. Sureshbhai Parmar, seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the Sessions Court concerned for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6, of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act .
4. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated 18.09.2024 and order of sentence passed in Special POCSO Case No.241 of 2021, whereby, the applicant herein was convicted and sentenced as under:
| Section | Imprisonment Fine | In default |
| S.4 of POCSO | R.I. for 10 Rs.50,0 years 00/- | Imprisonment for 1 year |
| S.6 of POCSO | R.I. for 20 Rs.50,0 years 00/- | Imprisonment for 1 year |
| S.376(2)(N) of IPC | No separate sentence being awarded. | |
5. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that the minor victim and the applicant accused are deaf and du
The court has discretion to suspend a sentence if the applicant demonstrates a case for it, considering the peculiar facts of the case.
The court suspended the applicant's sentence due to the lack of confidence in the victim's testimony and the backlog of pending appeals.
The court may suspend a sentence if the applicant demonstrates a compelling case, particularly considering the nature of the relationship and circumstances surrounding the case.
Suspension of sentence granted in light of the applicant's prior relationship with the victim and backlog of appeals, balancing the gravity of the offences with the rights of the accused.
The court may suspend a sentence if doubts arise regarding the conviction, particularly concerning the proof of the victim's age and the validity of consent.
The court may suspend a sentence if the applicant demonstrates a case for it, particularly considering the length of incarceration and the adequacy of evidence regarding the victim's age.
The court ruled that insufficient proof of the victim's age justified the suspension of the applicant's sentence under IPC and POCSO Act.
The court determined that the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the victim's age justified the suspension of the applicant's sentence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
