Jitendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1249 MP

    THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INDORE
                     BENCH

                           CRA No.1337/2021
                        Jitendra vs. State of M.P.


Indore, dated :05.04.2021
     Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
         Shri S. Karanjawala, learned counsel for the non-applicant -
State.
         The appeal contains arguable points.
         The appeal is accordingly admitted.
         Also heard on I.A. No.3736/2021 application seeking
suspension of jail sentence filed on behalf of appellant.
         The present criminal appeal is being filed arising out the
judgment dated 05.02.2021 passed in Special Case No.53/2018 by
Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, West Nimar, Mandleshwar. The
applicant has been convicted as under:-
  Conviction                             Sentence
Sections       and Imprisonment       Fine             Imprisonment in
Act                                                    lieu of fine
354 of IPC          1 Years R.I.      500/-            3 Months R.I
354 (a)(ii) of 1 Year R.I.            500/-            3 Months R.I
IPC
11(vi)/12 of 1 year R.I.              500/-            3 Months R.I
POCSO Act


         Learned counsel for the applicants submits that appellant
immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment has been
granted benefit of suspension on the same day. Short sentence of one
year has been pronounced in all the aforesaid sections. The appellant
has remained in jail for 35 days and at this stage, suspension of jail
sentence has been sought, that final hearing of this appeal is not
possible in near future, therefore, remaining jail sentence of the
appellant be suspended.
         Counsel for the State was heard and evidence was perused.
                   As per the evidence on record, the applicant caught hold hand
        of the minor prosecutrix and told her that he will pay Rs.600/- to her
        if she allows to him press her foot. When he went to take money, she
        fled from the spot and narrated the whole incident to her parents.
                  Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the aforesaid act
        does not amount to offence under POCSO Act.
                  Considered.
                  Looking to the fact that the appellant has been remained in jail
        for 35 days and his jail sentence is already suspended, it would be
        appropriate to allow the application.
                  The application stands allowed. Execution of jail sentence of
        appellant Jitendra is hereby suspended and it is ordered that the
        appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a
        sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand)              with one solvent
        surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a
        further direction to appear before the Trial Court on 04.05.2021 and
        also on such other dates, as may be fixed by the trial Court concerned
        in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
                  List in due course.
                  Certified copy, as per rules.


                                                     (Shailendra Shukla)
                                                                   Judge

        amit


AMIT KUMAR
2021.04.06

11:07:08 +05'30'