Omprakash Chakravarty vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2311 MP

                                                                          1                              CRA-1657-2021
                                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                          CRA-1657-2021
                                                    (OMPRAKASH CHAKRAVARTY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       3
                                       Jabalpur, Dated : 14-06-2021
                                             Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                             Shri Om Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant.
                                             Shri Prashant Mishra, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.

Record of the Court below is available.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing Also heard on I.A. No.4004/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant-Om Prakash Chakravarty.

The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 b y the appellant/accused against judgment dated 22.02.2021 passed by learned Session Judge, Katni (MP) in S.T. No. 56/19, by which the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 363 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/-. Default stipulations have also been imposed by the trial Court.

Prosecution case, in short, is that on 29.11.2018, appellant/accused kidnapped the prosecutrix (PW-3), below 18 years.

Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submits that learned trial Court committed grave error to convict and sentence the appellant/accused. Learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in perspective way. There is material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Prosecution has failed to prove the age of prosecutrix. Sandhya Patel (P.W.-

2) is the Principal of Saraswati Shishu Mandir, Bahoriband. She deposed before the trial Court that the date of birth of prosecutrix is 29.07.2002 but she admitted this fact that she did not know what is the source of date of birth of prosecutrix. P.W.-4 is mother of prosecutrix, she did not disclose the Signature Not Verified SAN date of birth of prosecutrix. So, it appears that learned trial Court held the age

Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.06.15 17:05:17 IST 2 CRA-1657-2021 of prosecutrix on estimation. It is evident from the record that prosecutrix voluntarily had gone from the house of her mother. Learned trial Court already acquitted the appellant/accused under Section 366 of IPC. So, it appears that evidence of prosecutrix is not reliable. Learned trial Court already suspended the execution of jail sentence of appellant/accused. This appeal is of the year 2021. There are fair chances to succeed in the appeal.

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 Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State has opposed the application.

Considering the argument of both the parties and perused the record, it appears that the age of prosecutrix is disputed, learned trial Court already acquitted the appellant/accused under Section 366 of IPC, learned trial Court already suspended the execution of jail sentence of appellant/accused, this appeal is of the year 2021, it is time of COVID-19 due to this final hearing of this appeal will take time, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am o f the considered opinion that it would be appropriate to suspend the execution of jail sentence awarded to the appellant and grant bail to him.

Consequently, I.A. No.4004/2021, is allowed subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited. The custodial sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal.

Appellant-Om Prakash Chakravarty 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 23.08.2021 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.

Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA
Date: 2021.06.15 17:05:17 IST
                                                                             3                           CRA-1657-2021

I n view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the appellant shall also comply with the rules and norms of social distancing. Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-

1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the appellant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The appellant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the appellant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing

him in appropriate quarantine facility.

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

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

L.R.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.06.15 17:05:17 IST