Ritik Alias Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4891 MP

                                                                       1                                 CRA-3141-2017
                                             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                        CRA-3141-2017
                                                    (RITIK ALIAS RAJAK Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    22
                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 01-09-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                          Shri S.B. Shrivastava, Advocate for the appellant.
                                          Shri Gopal Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Record of the trial Court has been received. Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

A l s o heard on I.A. No.11949/2020, which is repeat (Third) application for suspension of execution of jail sentence awarded to the appellant and grant of bail. Earlier two applications were dismissed for want of prosecution.

The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the appellant/accused against judgment dated 27.07.2017 in S.T. No.200067/2016 passed by learned Sessions

Judge/Special Judge/Presiding Officer Juvenile Court, Khandwa, District-Khandwa (M.P.), by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 377 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation in each.

As per prosecution case, on 19.04.2016, appellant/accused committed carnal intercourse with the son of complainant/Smt. Meena Sharma.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant did not commit any offence. He further submits that he has falsely been Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2021.09.03 11:58:27 IST 2 CRA-3141-2017 implicated in this case, due to old enmity of the appellant with the complainant party. There are many contradictions and omissions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. This appeal is of the year 2017. It is the time of COVID-19 Pandemic, due to this conclusion of trial will take sufficient time to conclude the same. There is fair chance to succeed

in the appeal. There is no likelihood of his absconding and tampering with the evidence. Under the circumstances, if the execution of sentence of the appellant is not suspended, his right to file appeal will be futile. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the present appellant-accused.

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State opposes the submission of appellant's counsel and prays for its rejection.

Heard and perused the record.

Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the evidence of Victim (P.W.1) and medical evidence of Dr. Anil Kandaardiya (P.W.4), it is not a fit case to suspend the execution of suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, in view of this, Court I. A . No.11949/2020 is rejected.

Accordingly, the said I.A. stands dismissed. List this matter for final hearing in due course, as per listings policy.

C.C. as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

Nitesh

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2021.09.03 11:58:27 IST