Sharif vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1982 MP

                                                                      1                                 CRA-4893-2020
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                      CRA-4893-2020

(SHARIF Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Jabalpur, Dated : 17-05-2021 Heard through Video Conferencing.

Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri B.D. Singh, learned Government Advocate for the State. Heard on IA No.10390/2021 which is an application for suspension of sentence of appellant Sharif.

The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 363 and 366 of the IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.2,000/- and R.I. for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no clear disclosure of age of the prosecutrix by PW/1, the prosecutrix and Sunder Bai(PW/2), the mother of the prosecutrix. He further submits that in the

school register (Ex.P/11), there is clear manipulation to the effect that the name of the elder sister has been scored off and the prosecutrix's name has been mentioned. Hence, on that basis, the age of the prosecurix has wrongly been determined by the trial court. He has further referred to paragraph 5 of the deposition of PW/2 and has submitted that the age of the prosecutrix at the time of incident was about 19-20 year. He has also referred to the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Ex.D-1 and has submitted that prosecutrix was a willing and consenting party and that the appellant has already remained in custody for about two and half years and offence under the provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not made out.

Signature Not Verified SAN Learned Government Advocate for the State has opposed the

Digitally signed by YOGESH KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2021.05.19 10:57:01 IST 2 CRA-4893-2020 suspension application and has referred to paragraph 12 and 16 of the judgment of the trial court.

Having regard to the statements of prosecutrix (PW/1) and the mother of the prosecutrix namely; Sunder Bai (PW/2), overwriting and manipulation pointed out in the school register (Ex.P/11), the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Ex.D/1 and the custody period of

the appellant, we are of the opinion that a case for suspension of sentence is made out.

Accordingly, IA No.3898/2021 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.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Only) with one surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 19.07.2021 and on subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court, the appellant Sharif be released on bail and the substantive sentence under appeal shall remain suspended.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                        (PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA)                                (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
                                               V. JUDGE                                            V. JUDGE


                                   YS




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by YOGESH KUMAR
SHRIVASTAVA
Date: 2021.05.19 10:57:01 IST