Ganesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2852 MP

                                                                         1                                CRA-1756-2021
                                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                         CRA-1756-2021
                                                     (GANESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                      3
                                      Jabalpur, Dated : 30-06-2021
                                            Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                            Shri M. PD. Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant.
                                            Shri Rajeshwar Rao, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State.

Appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard on I.A. No.4258/2021, which is an application for suspension of

sentence of appellant Ganesh.

The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo R.I. one year with fine of Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.3,000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecutrix had voluntarily accompanied the appellant as she was in love with him and in this regard he has referred to the statement of the proseuctrix (PW-2). He has also

submitted that as per her version the date of the birth in the school register was recorded by approximation. He has also referred to the statement of PW- 4 Durgesh, the assistant teacher of the school and has submitted that the date of birth disclosed as 19.06.2000 cannot be relied upon. His further submission is that even as per the said date of birth, the age of the prosecutrix comes to 17 and half years. Further submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the FSL report is negative and that the appellant was on bail during trial but he is in custody since the date of judgment of the trial Court and hearing of the appeal is likely to take time.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the suspension application and submitted that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of the Signature Not Verified SAN incident.

Digitally signed by AKANKSHA MAURYA Date: 2021.07.01 12:23:01 IST 2 CRA-1756-2021 Having regard to the nature of statement of the prosecutrix (PW-2) and the material which is pointed out by the counsel for the appellant especially the FSL report and the statement of the PW- 4 and that the appeal has already been admitted and hearing of appeal is likely to take time, we are of the opinion that a case for suspension of sentence is made out. Accordingly,

I.A. No. 4258/2021 is allowed.

It is directed that on deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with separate surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 23.08.2021 and on subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court, the appellant Ganesh be released on bail and the substantive sentence under appeal shall remain suspended.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                        (PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA)                          (ARUN KUMAR SHARMA)
                                               JUDGE                                             JUDGE


                                      Akm




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by AKANKSHA MAURYA
Date: 2021.07.01 12:23:01 IST