Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On: 02.01.2026 vs State Of H.P on 8 January, 2026
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
2026:HHC:2501
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP No. 3953 of 2025 in
Cr. Appeal No.112 of 2023
.
Reserved on: 02.01.2026
Date of Decision: 08.01.2026.
______________________________________________________
Joginder @ Abhishek ...Appellant/Applicant.
Versus
State of H.P. ...Respondent/Non-Applicant.
of
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
rt
For the appellant/applicant: Mr. George and Mr. Vinod Kumar Soni,
Advocates.
For the respondent : Mr. J.S.Guleria, Deputy Advocate
General.
4.___________________________________________________
Romesh Verma, Judge
This order shall dispose off an application filed by the appellant/applicant under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for suspension of execution of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.12.2022/ 24.12.2022 as passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (Rape/POCSO), Rampur Bushahr, H.P.
2. The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has submitted that applicant/appellant has been falsely roped and implicated in the present case as either directly or indirectly he 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS2 2026:HHC:2501 is not involved in any manner in the present case. He has stated that learned trial Court has not appreciated the oral as .
well as documentary evidence placed on record and had wrongly convicted the applicant/appellant for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- under Section 363 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, he shall have to undergo of simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Further he has been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period rt of 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs.7,000/- under Section 6 of POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he shall have to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
Both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
3. The applicant/appellant is in custody since 14th October, 2020 and he has completed almost 5 years of incarceration. It has been stated that there are fair chances of acquittal of the applicant/appellant, therefore, the present application deserves to be allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence is liable to be suspended/stayed during the pendency of the main appeal.
4. The State has filed reply to the application and they have vehemently opposed the present application. It has ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 3 2026:HHC:2501 been averred in the reply that applicant has indulged in serious offences and, therefore, no leniency can be shown to the .
applicant/appellant at the stage of appeal, that too, while deciding the application for suspension of sentence. He has further submitted that the sentence as passed by the learned Court below is based upon the statutory mandate. Lastly, he of has submitted that no case is made out for the suspension of sentence. rt
5. We have heard Mr. George and Mr. Vinod Kumar Soni, Advocates, appearing for the applicant/appellant and Mr. J.S.Guleria, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondent/State and have also scanned the record for the purpose of adjudicating the present application.
6. The occurrence in the present case has occurred on 13.10.2020, therefore, in the present case, the provisions of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 shall be applicable which reads as follows:
"94. Presumption and determination of age:--
(1) Where, it is obvious to the Committee or the Board, based on the appearance of the person brought before it under any of the provisions of this Act (other than for the purpose of giving evidence) that the said person is a child, the Committee or the Board shall record such observation stating the age of the child as nearly as may be and proceed with the ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 4 2026:HHC:2501 inquiry under section 14 or section 36, as the case may be, without waiting for further confirmation of the age.
.
(2) In case, the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding whether the person brought before it is a child or not, the Committee or the Board, as the case may be, shall undertake the process of age determination, by seeking evidence by obtaining--
(i) the date of birth certificate from the school, or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from of the concerned examination Board, if available; and in the absence thereof;
(ii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or rt a municipal authority or a panchayat;
(iii) and only in the absence of (i) and (ii) above, age shall be determined by an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test conducted on the orders of the Committee or the Board:
Provided such age determination test conducted on the order of the Committee or the Board shall be completed within fifteen days from the date of such order.
(3) The age recorded by the Committee or the Board to be the age of person so brought before it shall, for the purpose of this Act, be deemed to be the true age of that person."
7. In order to substantiate the guilt of the applicant/ appellant, the prosecution has examined, the child victim (PW-
3). She has stated that the accused met her on 13.10.2020, at Kholighat. He asked her as to where she was going, on which she told him that she was going to home. The applicant/appellant asked her to accompany him and forcibly ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 5 2026:HHC:2501 took her to Narkanda. Upto Tikker, he took her on foot and from Tikker, he took her in a vehicle to Narkanda. At Narkanda, .
the applicant/appellant took her to the room of his friend. For some time, they stayed in the room of the friend and, thereafter, the accused made a telephonic call to his friend and asked him that he required a room in a hotel for some of time. Victim stated that they kept sitting in the room but thereafter the accused started to do forcible act with her and rt committed rape upon her. PW-3 had stated that her date of birth is 18.04.2006. The said testimony of the victim is corroborated by her mother.
8. Smt. Usha Devi, the mother of victim, was examined as PW-1. She has stated that child victim told her that they stayed in a hotel at Narkanda and the accused had committed wrong act with her.
9. Sh. Palas Ram, the father of victim, examined as PW-2, has also stated the same thing, which has been deposed by PWs 1 and 3.
10. Ms. Vinod Kumari, Language Teacher, Govt.
High School, Jahu, District Shimla, H.P. was examined as PW-
4. She has deposed that on the application Ext. PW-4/A, the ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 6 2026:HHC:2501 headmaster Sh. Prem Shyam had issued birth certificate Ext.
PW-4/B on the basis of the record of the admission and .
withdrawal register Ext. PW-4/C. The date of birth of the victim has been shown to be 18.04.2006.
11. Smt. Mangla Devi, Secretary Gram Panchayat, Khunni Panoli, District Shimla, H.P. was examined as PW-5.
of She deposed that she issued birth certificate of the victim Ext.
PW-5/B and copy of the family register Ext. PW-5/C. The rt documents clearly show that on the date of the occurrence victim was about 14 years of age (at the time of occurrence the victim was minor). The testimony of the victim PW-3 is supported by PWs No. 1 and 2 and PW-14.
12. Dr. Apra Attri, Senior Resident, Tanda Medical College and Hospital, District Kangra, H.P. was examined as PW-14. She has stated that she issued MLC Ext. PW-14/B, which is in her hand and bears her signatures in red circle 'A' and the signatures of victim were obtained on the MLC in red circle 'A' on six places. Perusal of MLC Ext. PW-14/B, reveals that as per final opinion possibility of sexual intercourse cannot be ruled out.
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS7 2026:HHC:2501
13. For the determination of the present application, the applicant has failed to make out a prima facie case for the .
suspension of sentence. Learned Counsel for the applicant/ appellant failed to point out that there are fair chances of acquittal of the present applicant.
14. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied of upon the following judgments as follows:-
1. Jarnail Singh vs. State of Haryana, in rt Cr. Appeal No. 1200 of 2010, decided on 01.07.2013.
2. 'V' Vs. State of H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 246 of 2021, decided on 06.12.2024.
3. Sewak Ram @ Sanjeev vs. State of HP in Cr. Appeal No. 193 of 2022, decided on 09.01.2025.
4. Arun Kumar vs. State of H.P., in Cr.
Appeal No. 232 of 2020, decided on 22.07.2024.
5. Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju vs. State of Uttarakhad, in Cr. Appeal Nos. 630-631 of 2018, decided on 04.03.2025.
15. The said judgments are not applicable in the attending facts and circumstances, especially, for the suspension of sentence in the present case. Keeping in view the gravity of the offence and in view of the fact that a minor victim has been ravished by the applicant/appellant, at this ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 8 2026:HHC:2501 stage, no equitable relief can be granted while dealing with the application for suspension of sentence. The Hon'ble Apex .
Court in its decision has categorically held that the testimony/Statement of the child victim/ Prosecutrix has to be read with care, caution and seriousness.
16. In case State of Punjab vs. Gurmit Singh & of others, (1996) 2 SCC 384, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:- rt "8...The courts must, while evaluating evidence, remain alive to the fact that in a case of rape, no self- respecting woman would come forward in a court just to make a humiliating statement against her honour such as is involved in the commission of rape on her. In cases involving sexual molestation, supposed considerations which have no material effect on the veracity of the prosecution case or even discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix should not, unless the discrepancies are such which are of fatal nature, be allowed to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case. The inherent bashfulness of the females and the tendency to conceal outrage of sexual aggression are factors which the Courts should not over-look. The testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury. Why should the evidence of a girl of a woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation, be viewed with doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The Court while appreciating the ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 9 2026:HHC:2501 evidence of a prosecutrix may look for some assurance of her statement to satisfy its judicial conscience, since she is a witness who is interested in the outcome of the charge levelled by her, but there .
is no requirement of law to insist upon corroboration of her statement to base conviction of an accused. The evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands almost at par with the evidence of an injured witness and to an extent is even more reliable. Just as a witness who has sustained some injury in the occurrence, which is not found to be self inflicted, is considered to be a good witness in the sense that he of is least likely to shield the real culprit, the evidence of a victim of a sexual offence is entitled to great weight, absence of corroboration notwithstanding. Corroborative evidence is not an imperative rt component of judicial credence in every case of rape. Corroboration as a condition for judicial reliance on the testimony of the prosecutrix is not a requirement of law but a guidance of prudence under given circumstances. It must not be over-looked that a woman or a girl subjected to sexual assault is not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim of another persons's lust and it is improper and undesirable to test her evidence with a certain amount of suspicion, treating her as if she were an accomplice.
21. Of late, crime against women in general and rape in particular is on the increase. It is an irony that while we are celebrating women's rights in all spheres, we show little or no concern for her honour. It is a sad reflection on the attitude of indifference of the society towards the violation of human dignity of the victims of sex crimes. We must remember that a rapist not only violates the victim's privacy and personal integrity, but inevitably causes serious psychological as well as physical harm in the process. Rape is not merely a physical assault - it is often destructive of the whole personality of the victim. A murderer destroys the physical body of his victim, a rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female. The Courts, therefore, shoulder a great responsibility while trying an accused on charges of rape. They must deal with such cases with utmost sensitivity. The Courts should examine the broader ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 10 2026:HHC:2501 probabilities of a case and not get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution .
case. If evidence of the prosecutrix inspirers confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her statement in material particulars. If for some reason the Court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on her testimony, it may look for evidence which may lend assurance to her testimony, short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of the prosecutrix must of be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial court must be alive to its responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations."
rt
17. In the present case also since the victim is a minor, therefore, keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that no case is made out for the suspension of sentence in the present application.
18. We are aware of the fact that we are dealing with the case of a child victim. While deciding the application and before granting any relief to the appellant/applicant balance has to be maintained between the rights of the appellant/applicant and the victim.
19. From the attending facts and circumstances as well as the oral and documentary evidence placed on record for the determination of the present application, no case is made out for the suspension of the sentence. Further, no case ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS 11 2026:HHC:2501 is made out by pointing out that there are fair chances of acquittal in the present appeal.
.
20. Taking into consideration the entire factual matrix, we do not deem it fit to suspend the sentence during the pendency of the appeal. Therefore, the present application being devoid of any merit deserves to be dismissed and is of accordingly dismissed.
20. Before parting, it is made clear that any rt observation made here-in-above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the main case and the same shall be adjudicated upon uninfluenced by any observation made here-in-above, which are only for the purpose of the instant application.
( Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Romesh Verma) Judge January 08, 2026(Nisha) ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2026 20:43:32 :::CIS