Shivam Anuragi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1310 MP

                                                          1                                CRA-776-2021
                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                           CRA-776-2021
                                         (SHIVAM ANURAGI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                      2
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 06-04-2021
                               Shri Aniruddh Hingwasia, Advocate for the appellant.
                               Shri Manoj Kumar Jha, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

Record of the court below is available on record. Appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard on I.A.No.1856/2021, which is first application filed by the

accused/appellant, under section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of his jail sentence awarded by the Court of learned IV Addl. Sessions Judge Chhatarpur, District Chhatarpur (MP), in S.T. No.28/2019 vide its judgment dated 23.1.2011 convicting the appellant/accused for offence punishable under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo R I for 3 year with fine of Rs.2,000/-, under Section 323 of the IPC he is sentenced to undergo RI for nil with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation, on each count.

As per prosecution case, on 03.01.2019, appellant/accused outrage the

modesty of prosecutrix aged about 16 years and also beat her. It is alleged by prosecution that appellant/accused inflicted injury by belt to the prosecutrix and threatened to her.

Learned counsel for the accused/appellant submits that learned trial Court committed grave error to convicting and sentenced to the appellant/accused. Prosecutrix deposed before the trial Court that appellant/accused caught hold the hand of prosecutrix. So no case is made out under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act. Prosecutrix stated that appellant/accused inflicted injury to her by belt 8-10 times. She was examined by doctor but prosecution did not produce the Medical Officer or doctor before the trial Court. So injury of complainant is not proved. During

Signature Not the investigation, the statement of prosecutrix was recorded under Section SAN Verified

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.04.07 17:27:51 IST 2 CRA-776-2021 164 of Cr.P.C. by Judicial Magistrate First Class then prosecutrix did not mention the name of appellant/accused. So there are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. This appeal is of year 2021, trial will take time to conclude the same. There is fair chance to succeed in the appeal. There is no likelihood of his absconding and tampering with the evidence. Apart from this, learned trial Court has already suspended

execution of jail sentence. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail of present accused/ appellant.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the application. Having considered the arguments of both the parties and fact that it appears from the record that the sentence of execution of appellant is suspended by the trial Court, this appeal is of the year 2021, the name of appellant/accused is not mention in the statement of prosecution under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. accused/appellant is in jail since 23.1.2021 till now, he remained in jail during the trial from 25.2.2019 to 27.02.2019, this appeal is of year 2019, final hearing of this appeal will take time, but without commenting anything on the merit of the case, the said I.A. is allowed.

It is ordered that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already deposited, the execution of jail sentence of the appellant-Shivam Anuragi shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial court on 23.6.2021 and thereafter on all other such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard.

I n case, the appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the trial court then the said court shall be free to issue and execute warrant of arrest without referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.

I n view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the Signature SAN Not Verified

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.04.07 17:27:51 IST 3 CRA-776-2021 applicant shall also comply with the rules and norms of social distancing. Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-

1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the appellant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The appellant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the appellant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

List this matter for final hearing in due course, as per listing policy. C.C. as per rules.

                                                                (RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
                                                                           JUDGE
                      R




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
ROSHNI SINGH
PATEL
Date: 2021.04.07
17:27:51 IST