Abhisheik @ Janu Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3664 MP

                                                                       1                                  CRA-695-2017
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       CRA-695-2017
                                                  (ABHISHEIK @ JANU KOL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    21
                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 28-07-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                          Shri Sanjeev Tuli, Advocate for the appellant.
                                          Ku. Kamlesh Tamrakar, P.L. for the respondent-State.

Record of the Court below is available.

Heard on the question of admission and perused the record.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Heard on I.A. No.7158/2021, which is third application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Earlier two applications were dismissed as withdrawn.

The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 b y the appellant/accused against judgment dated 07.12.2016 passed by learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Maihar, Distt.-Satna, M.P. in S.T. No. 3400078/2016 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i)(j) of IPC and sentenced to

undergo R.I. for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation.

T he prosecution case in short that on dated 06.03.2016, appellant- accused commits aggravated penetrating sexual assault to the Victim.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant-accused has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned Trial Court has committed grave error to convict and sentence the appellant. Prosecutrix (PW-4) admitted this fact that she has deposed before the Trial Court about the alleged offence committed by the appellant-accused, according to saying of her mother. So her evidence is not wholly reliable. It is alleged by the prosecution that she deposed all the incident to her parents but the evidence of prosecutrix (PW-4) is not reliable then evidence of other witnsesses is also not reliable. Doctor Signature Not Verified SAN did not find any sign of sexual assault on the body of prosecutrix. Dr. V.K.

Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.07.29 10:29:02 IST 2 CRA-695-2017 Gautam (PW-10) prepared slide of the saliva of porsecutrix but FSL report is not produced by the prosecution. So, it appears that the FSL report is negative. Appellant-accused deposed before the Trial Court that there was some dispute between his mother and father of the prosecutrix and regarding this she has not given statement in the Court according to the father of the prosecutrix. So, appellant-accused is falsely implicated in this case.

Appellant-accused is 17 years old young boy. He has no previous criminal antecedent. He is in jail since 07.12.2016 and during trial he remained in jail from 08.03.2016 to 06.04.2016, so he has served half of his awarded jail sentence of 10 years. There are many contradictions, omissions and improvements in the version of the prosecution witnesses. This appeal is of year 2017. It is the time of COVID-19 due to which final conclusion will take time. There is every possibility to get success in the trial. Final hearing of this appeal will take time. Therefore, the application filed on behalf of the appellant may be allowed and the period of his remaining jail sentence may be suspended further and he may be released on bail.

Learned Panel lawyer for the respondent/State has opposed the application.

After hearing rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, looking to the circumstances of the case and the facts that prosecutrix has given her statement against the appellant-accused before the Trial Court according to the saying of her mother, appellant is in jail since 07.12.2016 and remained in jail during trial from 08.03.2016 to 06.04.2016, so he has served half of his awarded jail sentence, this appeal is of year 2017, it is the time of COVID-19 due to which final conclusion of its will take time but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate to suspend the custodial sentence awarded to the appellant and grant bail to him.

Consequently, I.A. No. 7158/2021 is allowed subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited. The custodial sentence awarded to the Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.07.29 10:29:02 IST 3 CRA-695-2017 appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal.

Appellant-Abhisheik @ Janu Kol be released from custody subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant shall appear and mark his presence before the trial Court on 04.10.2021 and shall continue to do so on all such future dates, as may be given by the trial Court in this behalf, during pendency of the matter.

List the appeal for final hearing in due course. C.C. as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

Pallavi

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.07.29 10:29:02 IST