Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ
Birendra Gope @ Bilendra Gope, Son Of Late Manu Gope – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I.A. No. 13852 of 2024:
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430(1) of the BNSS, 2023 for keeping the sentence in abeyance in connection with the judgment of conviction dated 18.07.2024 and order of sentence dated 19.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- I cum Spl. Judge, Gumla in connection with Sessions Trial No. 8/2021 arising out of Palkot P.S. Case No. 41/2020, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2)(n) and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years respectively.
2. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where even on consideration of the testimony of PW-8 (the victim), the testimony cannot be said to be trustworthy, reason being that she herself has admitted that she was subjected to rape time and again while living in the house of one co- accused namely Poko Devi, who subsequently has been acquitted, but while living in the house of Poko Devi, she had not made any complaint against the app
The victim's failure to report alleged rapes while living with a co-accused undermines her credibility, warranting suspension of the appellant's sentence pending appeal.
The court upheld the conviction for gang rape based on credible victim testimony, ruling that contradictions and co-accused acquittals do not automatically justify sentence suspension.
The court ruled that the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for suspension of sentence, as the victim's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence.
Inconsistencies in witness testimony can create reasonable doubt, leading to suspension of sentence pending appeal.
The victim's admission of consent complicates the prosecution's case under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC, warranting suspension of the appellant's sentence during appeal.
Presence at the crime scene can establish complicity under the POCSO Act, irrespective of whether physical acts are established.
The court affirmed the conviction under the POCSO Act, ruling that the trial court properly assessed the competency of the child witness, whose consistent testimony supported the prosecution's 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 affirmed that compelling evidence, including witness testimony and DNA analysis, justified the conviction and denied the suspension of the sentence.
Evidence of a prolonged relationship can influence the decision for suspending a sentence under IPC provisions, particularly where the victim's testimony supports the defense.
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
