Vallabh Prasad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7942 MP

1                                        Cr.A.No.1395-2016

    THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INDORE BENCH
                              Cr.A.No.1395-2016
          (Vallabh Prasad s/o Kanhaiyalal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Indore, Dated: 29.11.2021
       Shri Gaurav Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the
appellant.
       Shri Sameer Verma, learned Panel lawyer for the
respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.27104/2021, which is the fifth application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence of the sole appellant.

The appellant has been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge Shajapur vide judgment dated 22.9.2016 passed in S.T.No.101/2019 and sentenced him as under:-

    Conviction                            Sentence
Section        Act     Imprisonme           Fine        Imprisonment
                             nt                         in lieu of fine
    376        IPC     10 years RI        2000/-         2 months RI
    323    IPC     01 year RI      1,000/-    1 month RI

Appellant's earlier applications for suspension of jail sentence were dismissed as withdrawn. However, his second application I.A.No.1632/2017 was allowed on 3.3.2017 temporarily for a period of two days wherein he was sent for performing last rites of his father under police custody.

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in jail for the last five years four months and as such he has already completed more than half of the sentence awarded to him. It is further submitted that the case of the prosecution is that the appellant has committed the rape on the prosecutrix. However, the prosecutrix was married and her DNA has also not been obtained

by the prosecution which can be relied upon in such cases. It is submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated only on account of the dispute which took place between the appellant and the husband of the prosecutix on the other day which led filing of false case against the applicant and the doctor has also opined that the injuries suffered by the prosecutrix can be self inflicted. Hence, counsel has submitted that the application be allowed.

Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection.

On due consideration of the rival submissions and on perusal of the record and taking note of the fact that the appellant has been completed for more than half of the sentence, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court finds force with the contention raised by the counsel for the appellant, it would be expedient to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant. Accordingly, the application I.A.No.27105/2021 is allowed.

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 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 07.02.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR ) JUDGE moni

Digitally signed by MONI RAJU Date: 2021.11.30 10:14:23 +05'30'