Mukesh Dangi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2317 MP

                                                                         1                               CRA-2676-2021
                                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                           CRA-2676-2021
                                                         (MUKESH DANGI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                        2
                                        Jabalpur, Dated : 14-06-2021
                                              Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                              Shri Ayur Jain, Advocate for the appellant.
                                              Shri Prashant Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

Record of the court below is available on record.

Appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard on I.A.No.6319/2021, 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 learned XVIII Addl. Sessions Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), Bhopal, District Bhopal (MP), in S.T. No.50/2019, vide its judgment dated 23.3.2021 convicting the appellant/accused for offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/-, under Section 354-D of the IPC and Section 11(4)/12 of POCSO

Act, he is sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/-,with default stipulation.

A s per prosecution case, on 25.10.2018, proecutrix aged 17 years was going for coaching class. At that time, accused/appellant chased her by motorcycle, prosecutrix objected then accused/appellant proposed to sit on the motorcycle. She refused, then accused/appellant caught her hand with bad intention and forced her to sit on the motorcycle. She cried, then accused/ appellant ran away.

Learned counsel for the accused/appellant submits that learned trial Court committed grave error in convicting and sentencing the

Signature Not Verified SAN accused/appellant. There is no reliable evidence available on record Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.06.15 10:25:12 IST 2 CRA-2676-2021 on which it can be said that at the time of incident, prosecutrix was below 18 years. Learned trial Court already suspended the execution of jail sentence of accused/appellant. Accused/appellant remained in jail for some days during trial. There are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Actually, at the time of

incident, prosecutrix was seen with accused/appellant by her brother, so some dispute arose. Learned trial Court already acquitted the accused/appellant on same evidence under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act. This appeal is of year 2021. It is the time of COVID-19, so conclusion of this appeal will take long time. 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 execution of jail 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 and the fact that learned trial Court already suspended the execution of jail sentence of accused/appellant and he has been granted bail, accused/appellant is not previously convicted, he is already acquitted by the trial Court under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, this appeal is of year 2021, final hearing of this appeal will take time due to COVID-19, 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-Mukesh Dangi shall remain suspended during the Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.06.15 10:25:12 IST 3 CRA-2676-2021 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 23.8.2021 and thereafter on all other such subsequent dates, as may

be fixed by the trial court in this regard.

In 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 without referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the applicant 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 Vi ru s disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

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

C.C. as per rules.

Signature Not Verified SAN (RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.06.15 10:25:12 IST 4 CRA-2676-2021 A.Praj.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.06.15 10:25:12 IST