Santosh @ Santu Maharaj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8678 MP

                                                                         1                                CRA-3313-2021
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                     CRA No. 3313 of 2021
                                           (SANTOSH @ SANTU MAHARAJ Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


                                   Jabalpur, Dated : 13-12-2021
                                           Shri A.K. Tiwari, Advocate for the appellant.

                                           Shri Rahul Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

None for the respondent No. 2.

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

Heard on I.A.No.9946/2021, which is an 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 Special Judge SC/ST, Act Khandwa, District Khandwa (MP), in S.C. No.37/2018 vide its judgment dated 26.03.2021, convicting the appellant/accused under Section 354 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/- and Section 354-A of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 1 year and under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced him to undergo RI for 3 year with fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 3(1)(b)(1) of SC/ST Act

and sentenced him to undergo RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 3(2)(5-A) of SC/ST Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.500/-with default stipulation.

A s per prosecution case, on 04.07.2018 at about 9PM prosecutrix aged 15 years was going for answer of natural call. On the way, appellant/accused met her and told that he loves prosecutix. Thereafter, appellant/accused caught her hand then she cried. Thereafter, appellant/accused ran away.

Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submits that learned trial Court committed grave error in convicting and sentencing the accused/appellant. Actually, the parents of prosecutrix borrowed some money from the mother of appellant/accused due to this some dispute arose between both the parties. Thereafter, appellant/accused has falsely been Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH Date: 2021.12.13 17:43:31 IST 2 CRA-3313-2021 implicated in this case. Evidence of prosecutrix is not wholly reliable. No independent witness is examined by the prosecution. Appellant/accused is in jail since 26.03.2021 till now. Accused/appellant remained in jail during trial from 05.07.2018 to 11.07.2018 and 13.10.2020 to 16.10.2020 and 10.03.2021 to 16.03.2021. This appeal is of year 2021 and hearing of this appeal will take

time to conclude the same. Appellant/accused has served the substantial of his jail sentence. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. There is fair chance to succeed in the appeal. There is no likelihood of his absconding and tampering with the evidence. Under the circumstances, if the sentence of the appellant is not suspended, his right to file appeal will be futile. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail of present accused/ appellant.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, on perusal of the record and the fact that appellant/accused has served 8 to 9 months out of 3 years, this appeal is of year 2021, 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-Santosh @ Santu Maharaj 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 18.1.2022 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

Signature Not Verified without referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court SAN

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH Date: 2021.12.13 17:43:31 IST 3 CRA-3313-2021 is kept informed.

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

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE R

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH Date: 2021.12.13 17:43:31 IST