Raju vs State Of M.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 8228 MP

1                                             Cr.A.No.472-2021

     THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INDORE BENCH
                                 Cr.A.No.472-2021
       (Raju s/o Balu @ Balashankar Meena vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Indore, Dated: 04.12.2021
           Shri Anshul Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant.
           Shri    Sameer     Verma,       learned      Panel   lawyer     for     the
respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Record of the lower court is available.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A.No.655/2021, which is the first application

under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence of

the sole appellant-Raju.

The appellant has been convicted by the Additional Sessions

Judge Garoth, District-Mandsaur vide judgment dated 13.1.2021

passed in S.T. No.264/2015 and sentenced him as under:-

       Conviction                               Sentence
    Section        Act      Imprisonment              Fine       Imprisonment

                                                                 in lieu of fine
     363           IPC       5 Years RI              1,000/-      1 month RI
     366           IPC      10 Years RI              1,000/-      1 month RI
    376 (2)        IPC      10 Years RI              2,000/-      2 month RI
      (K)
 376 (2(i)         IPC      10 Years RI               500/-        1 year RI
    5(L) /6       POCSO     10 Years RI              500/-         1 year RI

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prosecutrix

was a consenting party and she had gone with the appellant on her own

volition. It is also submitted that so far as the age of the prosecutrix

is concerned, according to the prosecutrix, she was major at the

time of the incident, which is also not disputed by the prosecution.

Counsel has further submitted that the final hearing of the appeal is

likely to take a long time. In such circumstances, it is submitted that

the application be allowed and the jail sentence of the appellant be

suspended.

Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has

opposed the prayer.

On considering the aforesaid submissions, on perusal of the

record, this Court finds forced with the contention raised by the counsel

for the appellant, it would be expedient to suspend the jail sentence of

the appellant. Accordingly, the application I.A.No.655/2021 is allowed.

It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond by the appellant

in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with

a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial

Court, for his regular appearance before concerned trial Court, the

execution of the custodial part of the sentence imposed against the

appellant shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellant after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his

presence before the concerned trial Court on 20.1.2022 and on all

such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this

regard.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR ) JUDGE moni

Digitally signed by MONI RAJU Date: 2021.12.04 15:27:50 +05'30'