Sagar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2101 MP

                                     1


      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
                           CR.R.No.494/2021

                  (Sagar vs State of Madhya Pradesh)


Jabalpur, dated : 03.06.2021.

      Shri J.L. Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri S.M.Patel, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A.No.5123/2021 which is first application for suspension of sentence of the petitioner.

2. Vide judgment and order dated 28.09.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.185/15 by Ist ASJ, Itarsi, District Hoshangabad (M.P.) the judgment dated 27.02.2015 passed in Criminal Case No.258/2012 of JMFC, Ist Class Itarsi, District Hoshangabad has been upheld, whereby, the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced as under :

Convict        Sentence                                     In lieu of
 ion                             Fine if deposited
U/s 354 R.I. for 2 years        Rs.2000/-             Addl. Sentence S.I.
IPC                                                   for 3 months.

3. The conviction and sentence has been affirmed by the first Appellate Court vide judgment dated 28.09.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.185/15.

4. It is argued by Mr. Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner, that mother, grand-mother and friend of the prosecutrix have not supported

the case of prosecution. There is also exaggeration in the statement of the prosecutrix. Before the trial Court, she has stated that the petitioner got her hand inserted in his pant while no such statement has been made in the FIR or the police statement of the prosecutrix. Further it is argued that in her cross-examination, prosecutrix has admitted that she never made a claimour during the entire incident. She has admitted that from the place of the incident she came back home with the petitioner on the same motorcycle. Therefore, both the Courts below erred in relying on the statement of the prosecutrix. It is also submitted that the mother of the petitioner died on 12.08.2020. His father is 60 years old. The petitioner himself was 21 year old at the time of incident. The final hearing of the petition will take time. Therefore, custodial sentence of the petitioner be suspended.

5. Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer.

6. In her statement before the trial Court 8 years old innocent girl has revealed that when she was playing near a temple, the petitioner took her away on his motorcycle for a ride and after taking her at some distance kissed her. This statement remained intact during the cross- examination. Before the Court, the prosecutrix has stated that the petitioner also got her hand inserted in his pants while in FIR and police statement, it is mentioned that the petitioner inserted his hand into her jeans. He also cuddled her bums. Mother, father and grand-mother have supported the prosecutrix on material points.

7. Looking to the age of the prosecutrix and after going through her statement and the other evidence available on record, I do not deem it a

fit case to allow suspension to the petitioner. Therefore, I.A.No. I.A.No.5123/2021 is dismissed.

8. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to file an application for the out of turn final hearing of the petition.

9. Let the revision be listed for final hearing in due course.

(VIRENDER SINGH) V. JUDGE Digitally signed by BIJUb Date: 2021.06.07 17:53:08 +05'30'