news details |
|
|
| J&K High court denies suspension of sentence unless fair chance of acquittal exists | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Aug 7: In a significant development, a Division Bench of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Mohan Lal, ruled that no suspension of sentence should be granted to a convict unless there is a fair chance of acquittal upon reappreciating the evidence.
The order came in response to a petition filed by Rakesh Kumar, who sought the suspension of his sentence and release on bail in connection with FIR No. 11/2012 at Police Station Channi Himmat, Jammu. The trial court had convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 for the offence of rape of a minor girl aged 8 years, under Section 376 of the Ranbir Penal Code.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate OP Thakur represented the petitioner, while AAG Amit Gupta appeared on behalf of the Union Territory.
The Division Bench, after considering both sides, emphasized the gravity of the crime of rape and the impact it has on the victim, particularly a minor from a disadvantaged background. The Court acknowledged that the victim’s cry for justice could not be ignored, as she had endured physical agony and mental trauma due to the crime committed by the appellant/convict.
Notably, the appellant’s earlier bail application had been rejected by the High Court in a previous order dated March 17, 2022.
While deciding the current application for the suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) and the grant of bail to the appellant/convict, the Division Bench found that there was no apparent or gross irregularity on the face of the case record that indicated a prima facie chance of acquittal for the appellant/convict. The Court further noted that the appellant had already served imprisonment for 11 years and 6 days until February 3, 2023.
Consequently, the Division Bench held that the appellant/convict had failed to present a strong case for the suspension of sentence and release on bail at this stage. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence and release on bail was deemed misconceived and was disallowed, rejected, and dismissed.
In consideration of the appellant/convict’s extended period of incarceration, the Division Bench deemed it appropriate to expedite the hearing of the main appeal.
This decision reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring a fair and just legal process, emphasizing the importance of considering the victim’s rights and the gravity of the offence while assessing requests for suspension of sentence and bail applications. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
