ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

The instant application for suspension of sentence has been moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated 21.02.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Court No.2, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.106/2021 (C.I.S. No.84/2018) whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment of twenty years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.25,000/- under Section 376D of IPC read with 5(G)/6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and lesser punishmentS for the other offences under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC.

2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court. He was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to him; hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the point of consideration in this application for suspension of sentence would be that the story as set out by the prosecution has not been found credible by the Investigating Officer to the large extent. The victim alleges that she was subjected to rape on 16.01.2015 while the Investigating Officer has made a categorical finding in the charge sheet that incident took place during night of 11.01.2015. The most important aspect of consideration would be that the victim has categorically alleges that she was subjected to rape by three persons, namely, Ankit Kumar, Amandeep @ Deepa and Sunny. However, after conducting a thorough investigation, the involvement of the third accused Sunny has not been found proved and, thus, he was exonerated from charges by the police itself. Neither he was charge sheeted nor any application under Section 190, 193 or Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has been moved at the behest of the prosecution despite the fact that the victim has reiterated charges in her previous statement and the statement recorded on oath during trial. Other grounds have been raised which would be taken into consideration at the time of hearing of the appeal. Thus, in view of the above, and the fact that the appellant was on bail during the course of trial and the hearing of appeal is likely to take further more time and considering the overall submissions while refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of the appeal, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Court No.2, Sriganganagar vide judgment dated 21.02.2022 in Sessions Case No. 106/2021 (C.I.S. No.84/2018) against the appellant-applicant- Deepa @ Amandeep Singh S/o Kala Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal