Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J., SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Chandan Saw, son of Krishna Saw – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal includes facts of suspension of sentences and initial judgments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. parties present contrasting arguments regarding the alleged offense. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court assesses evidence and testimony impacting the case for suspension. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. criteria established for suspension of sentence based on testimony. (Para 8) |
| 5. court grants petition for suspension with conditions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
Order :
I.A. No. 993 of 2025
1. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430 (1) of B.N.S.S, 2023 for suspension of sentence dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned A.J.C-XX, Ranchi in Sessions Trial Case No.201 of 2021 arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 54 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1695 of 2021, by which the appellant has been sentenced and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 (2)(n) of the I.P.C and in default of payment of fine, further S.I. for six (06) months.
2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that it is the case where no ingredient of Section 375 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE is made out and t
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.
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.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the appeal process is delayed significantly and key witness credibility is in question.
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.
The court ruled the victim's consistent testimony sufficiently supports conviction under the POCSO Act, thus rejecting the suspension of sentence.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the accused shows circumstances such as prior bail status, marriage to the prosecutrix, and delays in FIR filing, indicating a potential for prolonged appeal.
The absence of conclusive proof of the victim's age and the consensual nature of the relationship justified the suspension of the sentence under the POCSO Act.
The existence of a marriage and subsequent litigation initiated by the victim undermines the applicability of rape charges under Section 376 of the IPC.
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
