ORDER :

Accused-appellant has preferred this application for suspension of sentence.

2. Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the appellant has remained in custody for a period of more than six years. There is delay of three days in lodging of FIR. The samples which were drawn were not deposited in the malkhana and it is only after the arrest of the accused-appellant that the samples were sent to the FSL. It is also contended that it is a clear case of false implication for the very reason that the incident is said to have been taken place on 19.11.2016. Vaginal swab and vaginal smear was taken on 23.11.2016. In the report with regard to vaginal swab and vaginal smear, no human semen was detected. It is also contended that the underwear of the victim was recovered after arrest of accused on 17.12.2016, therefore, the DNA report loses its significance as the recovery of the underwear was made after a month of occurrence. It is also contended that there was a rivalry between the parties with regard to some amount and mother of the victim had threatened the appellant of lodging a false case. It is also further that medical report also does not support the prosecution version, rather it makes the case of prosecution false.

4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate and counsel appearing for the complainant have opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is contended by counsel for the complainant that the victim is a nine year old girl. There is no reason why the victim and her sister have levelled false allegations against the appellant. It is also contended that the victim had injuries on her private part which goes to show that the accused had committed the alleged offence. It is also contended that appellant has criminal antecedents.

5. We have considered the contentions.

6. Admittedly the victim, as per the evidence available on record had informed her mother about the incident on the same day. No justifiable reason has been assigned for delay in lodging of FIR. From the DNA profile of the victim, and vaginal swab and vaginal smear, it is evident that no semen was found. However, in the underwear which was recovered by the police after the arrest of accused, semen found on the underwear was found to be matching. Since this recovery was made almost after a month of the incident and after the arrest of the accused, the DNA report loses its significance. The medical report also does not support the allegations levelled by the victim against the present appellant.

7. Considering the same as also the fact that appellant has remained in custody for a period of more than six years, disposal of appeal is bound to take time, we deem it proper to allow the suspension of sentence application.

8. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-appellant in Sessions Case No.32/2018 (227/2017) shall remain suspended if the appellant furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(one lac only) and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- (fifty thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.