Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010202002024 2025:GAU-AS:719 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/919/2024 RAJMUL HUSSAIN S/O. ALAL UDDIN, R/O.- MADHAYAM HATIJUJUWA, P/S- JAJORI, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:NUR MOHAMMAD S/O.- MAMUD ALI VILL.- HATIJUJUWA P/S- JAJORI DIST.- NAGAON ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, U U KHAN,MR A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 23.01.2025 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1 and Mr. M. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/informant. 2. This is an application under Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 praying for suspension of sentence and to release the applicant on bail during the pendency of the connected appeal, being Crl. A. No. 314/2024. 3. It is to be mentioned here that vide the impugned judgment and order dated 05.08.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge, Nagaon in Special POCSO Case No. 62/2017, arising out of Jajori P.S. Case No. 81/2017, the applicant has been convicted under Section 4 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 (seven) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only, in default to undergo R.I. for another 1 (one) month. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant, that out of love affair, the applicant and the victim eloped and got married. But, subsequently, the F.I.R. was lodged, investigation was conducted and the charge-sheet was also filed and, after completion of hearing, the conviction order was passed against the present convict/applicant. However, both the applicant and the victim were staying as husband and wife and out of their Page No.# 3/5 wedlock, 2 (two) children are also born. He further submitted that the affidavit in the present interlocutory application is also filed by the victim as there is none to file the affidavit on behalf of the applicant. He also submitted that during the entire period of trial, the applicant was on bail and he never jumped over any conditions of bail. Accordingly, he submitted that considering the future of the children also, who are along with the victim at present, the present applicant may be released on bail. More so, the victim is facing very much difficulty in maintaining the children in absence of the present applicant. 5. Mr. Ahmed further relied on a decision of Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court dated 10.01.2025, passed in I.A.(Crl.) No. 929/2024 (in Crl. A. No. 318/2024), wherein also, considering the similar kind of situation, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court had passed the order of bail suspending the sentence imposed on the accused therein. 6. He also relied on a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported vide (2001) 9 SCC 211 (Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M.P.) and basically emphasized on paragraph No. 3 of the judgment, which reads as under: 3. this Court has held in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai v. State of Gujarat that when a person is convicted and sentenced to a short-term imprisonment the normal rule is that when his appeal is pending the sentence should be suspended and rejection is only by way of exception and be put forward for such rejection. In such case also every endeavour should be made to have the appeal posted for early hearing and disposal. If the shot-term sentence is allowed to run out during the pendency of the appeal, the appeal itself will become, for all practical purposes, infructuous so far as the appellant is concerned. It does not mean that the appellate court should suspend the sentence, if its consequence would be a danger to the society or any other similar difficulties. Page No.# 4/5 7. Accordingly, he submitted that the present applicant is a permanent resident of his addressed locality and he will provide the genuine surety if he is allowed to remain on bail till disposal of the connected appeal, being Crl. A. No. 314/2024, by suspending the sentence imposed on him. 8. Ms. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that the entire conviction is based on the evidence of the P.W.-1, i.e. the victim of this case, and there is nothing to disbelieve the evidence of P.W.-1 and hence, she raised objection and submitted that it is not a fit case to consider the bail prayer for the present applicant at this stage. 9. Mr. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, submitted in this regard that after the incident, both the applicant and the victim got married and they were peacefully residing as husband and wife along with their 2 (two) children and hence, being the informant of this case, he has no objection if the accused is released on bail by suspending the sentence imposed on convict/applicant. 10. Considering the entire submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides and also considering the peculiar circumstances of this case where the victim already got married with the convict/applicant, without discussing the detail in merit of the case, I find it appropriate to allow this interlocutory application. Accordingly, the operation of the sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Nagaon, in Special POCSO Case No. 62/2017, vide judgment and order dated 05.08.2024, stands suspended till disposal of the connected appeal, being Crl. A./314/2024. Page No.# 5/5 11. Further, the applicant is hereby allowed to go on bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Nagaon, Assam. 12. In terms of above, this interlocutory application stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant