IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 329 of 2023 With I.A. No. 15954 of 2025 ---------

Bhartu Yadav, aged about 25 years, son of Late Charka Mahto, resident of Village-Birajpur, P.O. & P.S.-Sonaraithari, District-

Deoghar, Jharkhand.

… … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ---------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ----------

For the Appellant : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.

-----------

05/Dated: 19^th January, 2026 I.A. No. 15954 of 2025:

1. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed under Section

430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita seeking therein suspension of sentence dated 23.01.2023 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO, Deoghar, in POCSO Case No. 37 of 2020, arising out of Deoghar (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 4 of 2020, whereby and where under the applicant has been held guilty for the charge under Section 376 (1) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) and in default of payment of fine the applicant has been further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months for the charge under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and the period of custody during investigation and trial of this case is directed to be set off.

2. Mr. Ankit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present interlocutory application has been filed for suspension of sentence primarily on the ground of completion of half of the sentence.

3. It has been contended that earlier, on merits, the prayer for suspension of sentence has been rejected vide order dated 30.08.2023 passed in I.A. No. 6790 of 2023.

4. Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence and has submitted that merely on the ground of completion of half of the sentence, the sentence cannot be suspended taking into consideration the nature of crime committed by the applicant which has conclusively been proved having been dealt with by this Court while considering the prayer made for suspension of sentence in I.A. No. 6790 of 2023.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the order of rejection passed by this Court vide order dated 30.08.2023 in I.A. No. 6790 of 2023. For ready reference, the said order is being reproduced as under:

“I.A. No. 6790 of 2023 The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking therein suspension of sentence dated 23.01.2023 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO, Deoghar, in POCSO Case No. 37 of 2020, arising out of Deoghar (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 4 of 2020, whereby and where under the appellant has been held guilty for the charge under Section 376 (1) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and is further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) and in default of payment of fine the appellant has been further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months for the charge under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and the period of custody during investigation and trial of this case is directed to be set off.

2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charge said to be beyond reasonable doubt. Such submission has been made on the ground that there are contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

3. It has further been argued by referring to the testimony of P.W.- 4, the victim, P.W.-1, the mother, and P.W.-2 the father, having major contradictions and in view thereof the learned Trial Court ought to have taken into consideration the aforesaid contradiction befo