Allahabad HC Issues Show Cause Notice To POCSO Convicts For 'Abusing' Court After Pronouncement Of Sentence

A bench of Justice Manoj Bajaj observed that prima facie, the said conduct of convicts was “aimed to lower the authority of the court” and amounted to criminal contempt of the Court.

The Court passed this order while hearing an appeal and an application to suspend the sentence of two convicts (Satish Sharma and Harish Sharma) in connection with their conviction under Sections 354, 504 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, 2012 vide order and judgement passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mathura in February 2021.

The Special Judge had imposed a sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 354 IPC, five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 8 POCSO Act with a fine of Rs.10,000/—, and two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 504 IPC with a fine of Rs.4,000/.

It was alleged that after they were handed down sentences, they used abusive expressions against the court.

The Counsel for the convicts argued that a period of four years, the applicants-appellants have already undergone two months and hence, it was prayed that their sentence be suspended during the pendency of the appeal

On the other hand, the counsel for the complainant (Advocate Vinay Kumar Tripathi) argued that the judgment of conviction is based upon proper appreciation of the prosecution evidence on record, and the applicants are also involved in a number of other cases; therefore, they do not deserve the concession.

The Counsel for the appellants also referred to the appellants' conduct before the presiding judge resorting to contemptuous conduct and spoiling the decorum of the Court after the pronouncement of the order on sentence.

Upon hearing the counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, the High Court opined that the appellants have already served more than four years in custody out of a five-year sentence. Therefore, their further detention behind bars may not be justified.

The Court also noted that if the applicants' sentence is not suspended, the sole right of appeal provided to the convicts by CrPC may be rendered infructuous.

Hence, their remaining sentence was suspended, subject to their furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of CJM Mathura.

However, before parting with the order, the Court referred to the subsequent order dated 12.02.2021 passed by the Presiding Officer highlighting the conduct of the convicts, and it issued a show cause notice to them.