Rajulal @ Raju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1508 MP

                                  1                                CRA-289-2020
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   CRA-289-2020
                 (RAJULAL @ RAJU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

3
Indore, Dated : 22-04-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.
      Mr. Nilesh Dave, Advocate for the appellant.
      Mr. Bhaskar Pandey, Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.1287/2021 which is the first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.12,000/- and Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.12,000/- in default R.I. for 6 months and R.I. for 6 months respectively vide judgment dated 24.12.2019 passed in S.T. No.491/2017 by Additional Sessions Judge, Nagda, District Ujjain.

Shri Nilesh Dave, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the accused/appellant has been convicted for very serious offences having severe consequences of sentence of Life Imprisonment under Section

376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act whereas the stringent provisions contained in POCSO Act and Section 376(2) (N) of I.P.C. would require stringent degree of proof. In the present case, the evidence against the accused/appellant stands on very shaky grounds.

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that firstly the alleged incident, according to the case of the prosecution, had taken place on 01.01.2015 whereas the F.I.R. in the present case was lodged highly belatedly on 02.02.2017 after 13 months without any explanation for delay. The order of the learned trial Court on this aspect is completely silent. Learned counsel further argued that the prosecutrix (PW-3) has made lot of exaggerations and embellishment in her statement. She has alleged that she was given on adoption to Smt. Rinki Joshi by her mother by Smt. Saroj (PW-2). It is 2 CRA-289-2020 submitted that Smt. Rinki Joshi used to take her to the place of accused/appellant who was her cousin and whenever she would make complaint of the activities of appellant to her (Smt. Rinki Joshi) she would always ignore the same.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the accused/appellant has committed rape with her several occasions and that she used to have

bleeding. It is argued that the prosecutrix has made exaggeration which is proved from the medical report Ex.P-12 proved by PW-8 Dr. Neha Chaturvedi who in her testimony before the trial Court has stated that not only there was no injury on the private part of the prosecutrix but her hymn was fully intact and there was no bleeding of any kind. Dr. Vaijyanti Ahirwar who initially examined the prosecutrix has not been produced but her assistance PW-10 Dr. Atul Mandwariya has appeared to prove the medical examination report Ex.P-14 dated 30.01.2017, according to which, the first version of the prosecutrix was that the accused has touched her private part but according to Dr. Vaijyanti Ahirwar who at the earlier point of time after the lodgement of the F.I.R. medically examined her, in her medical examination report Ex.P-14 she has clearly deposed that "according to her the hymn of the prosecutrix was intact". It is submitted that the accused was arrested on 03.02.2017 and since then he is in jail. He has completed incarceration of more than 4 years and 2 months. Considering that large number of appeals are pending before this Court, hearing of the present appeal is likely to take long time.

Mr. Bhaskar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Having regard to the rival submissions made and considering the totality of the circumstances and evidence on record but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the application I.A. No.1287/2021 and suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant.

It is directed that the remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon 3 CRA-289-2020 the appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

The jail authorities shall have the appellant checked by the jail doctor to ensure that he is not suffering from the coronavirus and if he is, he shall be sent to the nearest hospital designated by the state for treatment. If not, he shall be transported to his place of residence by the jail authorities.

C.C. as per rules.

                (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                                         (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
                 CHIEF JUSTICE                                                   JUDGE


     psm
Digitally signed by
PREM SHANKAR
MISHRA
Date: 2021.04.23
14:25:11 +05'30'