Gauhati High Court
Sri Utpal Debnath vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 26 February, 2020
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010153902019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.A. 276/2019
1:SRI UTPAL DEBNATH
S/O- SRI ASIM DEBNATH, R/O- VILL.- MORAKORDOIGURI GAON, P.S.
BOKAJAN, DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP. BY THE P.P., ASSAM.
2:SRI HAREN RAJBONGSHI
S/O- SRI ABHIRAM RAJBONGSHI
SANIHAJAN
GUWAHATIAGAON
P.S. BOKAJAN
DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Linked Case : I.A.(Crl.) 578/2019
1:SRI UTPAL DEBNATH
S/O- SRI ASIM DEBNATH
R/O- VILL.- MORAKORDOIGURI GAON
P.S. BOKAJAN
DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/3
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP. BY THE P.P.
ASSAM.
2:SRI HAREN RAJBONGSHI
S/O- SRI ABHIRAM RAJBONGSHI
SANIHAJAN
GUWAHATIAGAON
P.S. BOKAJAN
DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP
ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 26-02-2020 Heard Mr. P. Hazarika, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant; Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, State of Assam for respondent-opposite party no. 1; and Ms. M. Barman, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-opposite party no. 2.
This application has been preferred under Section 389, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the CrPC, for short) for suspension of the execution of the sentence passed against the applicant-appellant and for his release on bail. The applicant-appellant has been convicted by the judgment and order dated 11.06.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, Assam in POCSO Case No. 03/2017 whereby he has been convicted under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the POCSO Act, for short). For the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 (ten) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to pay the fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for another 2 (two) months. He has also been convicted under Section 363, Indian Penal Code (the IPC, for Page No.# 3/3 short) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 (six) months.
Mr. Hazarika in his submission has referred to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164, CrPC. It is submitted by him that a conjoint reading of the said statement of the victim recorded under Section 164, CrPC and her testimony as P.W.7 before the trial Court establishes the fact that the victim had made vast improvement in her version from her previous statement recorded under Section 164, CrPC.
In view of such submission, the testimony of the victim, P.W.7 has been perused. P.W.7 has exhibited her statement recorded under Section 164, CrPC as Ext.-3 but the defence has not brought any contradiction in that regard by putting her previous statement to the victim. I have also perused the judgment of the learned trial Court. Having gone through the same, I am of the opinion that this application does not merit consideration at this stage. Accordingly, it is rejected.
It is submitted by Mr. Hazarika that the applicant-appellant is in custody undergoing his sentence since the date of the judgment and order of conviction of sentence and the appeal may be heard expeditiously.
Having considered all the aforesaid aspects, it is ordered that Registry may list the appeal for an expeditious hearing.
With the aforesaid observations, this application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant