Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukesh @ Appu Nanda vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 December, 2021
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 CRA-1551-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 1551 of 2021
(MUKESH @ APPU NANDA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Jabalpur, Dated : 21-12-2021
Shri M.K. Pandey, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Dinesh Patel, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.
Shri Ankit Singour, learned counsel for the complainant.
Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A.No. 3777/2021 which is an application filed by the
appellant under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
Accused/appellant has been convicted vide impugned judgment
dated 24.02.2021 passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge and
Special Judge of (POCSO), Act S.C No.81/2019 under Section 363 of
IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03
years with fine of Rs.500/-, Section 366 of IPC and has been sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 05 years with fine of Rs.500/- and
Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default
stipulations in each.
A s per prosecution story, on 01.09.2017, prosecutrix aged about
17 years was missing from her house. She was searched but not found.
FIR was lodged. Thereafter, prosecutrix was recovered on 19.10.2017
from the possession of appellant/accused. It is alleged by the prosecution
that appellant/accused kept prosecutrix in a house and committed
intercourse with her.
Learned counsel for the appellant-accused submits that learned
trial Court committed grave error to convict and sentence to the
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH
Date: 2021.12.21 15:54:21 IST
2 CRA-1551-2021
appellant/accused. Learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence
in perspective way in regard of age of the prosecutrix. Learned trial
Court itself determined the age of prosecutrix is below 18 years. It is
alleged by the prosecution that the date of birth of prosecutrix is
07.02.2000 and the date of incident is 01.09.2017 according to the
prosecution. The age of prosecutrix is 17 years 6 months but at the time
of incident prosecutrix was above 18 years. Appellant/accused and
prosecutrix loved each other but the parents of prosecutrix were not
ready to accept their relation. So, they ran away. Prosecutrox(PW-2)
herself admitted this fact that she loves the appellant/accused and also
she was seen with appellant/accused by her uncle. Thereafter, her uncle
rebuke her. She wants to solemnize marriage with appellant/accused due
to this it is a matter of love affair. Appellant/accused is 25 years young
person. There are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence
of witnesses. This appeal is of the year 2021. He is in jail since
24.02.2021. Final hearing of this appeal will take considerable time for its
final disposal. There is fair chance to succeed in the appeal. Under these
circumstances, i f the sentence of the appellant/accused is not suspended,
purpose to file this appeal will be futile. Hence, prayer is made for suspension
of execution of jail sentence and grant of bail of present accused/appellant.
Lear ned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the bail
application.
Learned counsel for the complainant submits that prosecutrix wants
to marry with the appellant/accused, therefore, she has no objection to
grant bail to the appellant/accused.
Hearing arguments of both the parties and the facts that prosecutrix
herself admitted this fact that she loves appellant/accused and also she
wants to marry with him, complainant has no objection to grant bail to the
Signature Not Verified
SAN
appellant/accused, appellant-accused is in jail since 24.02.2021, this
Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH
Date: 2021.12.21 15:54:21 IST
3 CRA-1551-2021
appeal is of the year 2021, final hearing of this appeal will take time, but
without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I.A.No.
3777/2021 is allowed.
It is ordered that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already
deposited, the execution of jail sentence of accused/appellant-Mukesh
@ Appu Nanda shall remain suspended during the pendency of this
appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond
for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for
his appearance before the trial Court on 08.03.2022 and thereafter on all
other such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the trial Court in this
regard.
In case, accused/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.
List this matter for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE
R
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH
Date: 2021.12.21 15:54:21 IST
