Rajendra @ Raju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2758 MP

                                        1
  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
                       Cr. A. No.7043 of 2019
                  Rajendra @ Raju Vs. State of M.P.

Indore, Dated:- 28/06/2021

       Heard through video conferencing.

       Shri Kaushal Sisodiya, Counsel for the appellant - Rajendra @ Raju

S/o Ramsingh @ Rama.

       Ms. Geetanjali Chourasiya, Counsel for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.1770/2021, second application under Section 389

(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail sentence

and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant.

The present appellant has been convicted and sentenced by Special

Judge, POCSO Act, Badnawar, District - Dhar (MP) in Special Case

No.43/2016 vide judgment dated 31.07.2019, as under: -

         Conviction                              Sentence
    Section        Act          RI          Fine amount Imprisonment in
                                                          lieu of fine
   363        IPC, 1860      3 years    Rs.1,000/-     1 month RI
   366        IPC 1860       5 years    Rs.1,000/-     1month RI
   376(2)     IPC 1860       10 years   Rs.2,000/-     2 months RI
   (N)
   6          POCSO Act 10 year Rs.2,000/- 2 months RI

First application for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant was

dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15.10.2019.

The Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prosecutrix

(PW-1) was major at the time when the incident took place and was a

consenting party. He has also drawn the attention of this Court towards the

various statements and the findings recorded by the learned Judge of the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE Cr. A. No.7043 of 2019 Rajendra @ Raju Vs. State of M.P.

trial Court.

Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer.

Having considered rival submissions and on perusal of deposition of

prosecutrix (PW-1) especially para 21 as also the deposition of Doctor

Sudhir Modi (PW-6), who found age of the prosecutrix to be more than 18

years and the fact that the date of incident is 05.09.2015 and her x-ray

report was obtained on 06.02.2016, this Court finds it to be an arguable

case, thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, IA No.1770/2021

is allowed and it is directed that on furnishing a personal bond by the

appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a

solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial

Court, for his / her regular appearance before concerned trial Court, the

execution of the custodial part of the sentence imposed against the

appellant shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellant, after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his presence

before the concerned trial Court on 12.08.2021 and on all such subsequent

dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.

C. c. as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE Pankaj

Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANDEY Date: 2021.07.03 17:41:37 +05'30'