Pawan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2422 MP

                                                                          1                            CRA-1786-2021
                                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                          CRA-1786-2021
                                                           (PAWAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       4
                                       Jabalpur, Dated : 16-06-2021
                                             Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                             Shri Shailendra Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant.
                                             Shri Rahul Tripathi, 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.4339/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant-Pawan.

The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 b y the appellant/accused against judgment dated 12.02.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khandwa (MP) in S.C. No. 44/2018, by which the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 457 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.2500/- and Section 8 of POCSO Act and has been sentenced to

undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.2500/. Default stipulations have also been imposed by the trial Court.

Prosecution case, in short, is that on 03.04.2018, at about 10.00 pm, prosecutrix (PW-2), aged 17 years, was sleeping in her room, then appellant/accused entered into the room of prosecutrix and pressed her breast. Thereafter, she cried then parents of prosecutrix reached on the spot. Thereafter, appellant/accused ran away from there.

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. Prosecution has totally failed to prove the age of prosecutrix. At the time of Signature Not Verified SAN incident, prosecutrix was above 18 years. Appellant/accused and prosecutrix

Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.06.16 17:22:29 IST 2 CRA-1786-2021 love each other. But at the time of incident, parents of prosecutrix reached on the spot. Due to this, appellant/accused has falsely been implicated in this c as e. Learned trial Court already acquitted the appellant/accused under Section 376 and 506-II of IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act. There is material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Appellant/accused remained in jail during the trial from 04.04.2018 to

01.10.2018. 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 376 and 506-II of IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, appellant/accused remained in jail during the trial from 04.04.2018 to 01.10.2018, 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 of 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.4339/2021, 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-Pawan 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.

Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA
Date: 2021.06.16 17:22:29 IST
                                                                             3                           CRA-1786-2021

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.

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: 2021.06.16 17:22:29 IST