Rohit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4969 MP

                                              1
                                                                                  CRA No.7126/2019

               High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur
                           Bench at Indore
            Criminal Appeal No.7126/2019
Indore, Dated 02.09.2021
        Shri Rajendra Kumar Gondale, learned counsel for appellant

Rohit s/o Shantilal @ Mangilal Verma.

        Shri Avdhesh Polekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the

respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh.

Heard on IA No.2265/2021, repeat (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

learned Special Judge (under POCSO Act, 2012), Mandleshwar,

District West Nimar (MP) in Special Sessions Trial No.SC/93/2018

vide judgment dated 6th August, 2019, as under: -

               Conviction                              Sentence
     Section            Act          RI           Fine amount     Imprisonment in lieu of fine
       363              IPC        5 years        Rs.1,000/-         1 month additional RI
      366-A             IPC        5 years        Rs.1,000/-         1 month additional RI
       344              IPC        6 months       Rs.1,000/-         1 month additional RI
   5(L)r/w 6     POCSO Act, 2012   10 years       Rs.7,000/-          1 year additional RI

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that his earlier

application (IA No.6997/2019) has been dismissed by this Court on

19.11.2019 as withdrawn.

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in

jail since 28.11.2019 and the final disposal of the appeal is likely to

CRA No.7126/2019

take sufficiently long time.

It is further submitted that the prosecutrix was the consenting

party as she also solemnized marriage with the appellant,

photographs regarding which have also been proved in evidence as

Ex.P/3 onward.

Counsel has also submitted that the age of the prosecutrix,

according to the prosecution, is 17 years whereas, the appellant's

contention is that she is more than 18 years and no cogent document

has been placed on record to prove her date of birth, except the

scholar register.

Counsel has further submitted that the prosecutrix in her

statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the prosecutrix has not uttered a single word against the

appellant and it is only because of family dispute between the two

families, that he appellant has been falsely implicated in the case.

Thus, it is submitted that the application for suspension of jail

sentence be allowed and the appellant be released on bail.

Counsel for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh opposed

the application by submitting that no sufficient ground is made out

for releasing the appellant on bail; hence the application filed by the

appellant be dismissed.

Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the

record including the statement of the prosecutrix, this Court finds

CRA No.7126/2019

force with the contention raised by the learned counsel for the

appellant. In view of the same, this Court is of the considered

opinion that the application for suspension of custodial sentence

deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the

case, IA No.2265/2021 is allowed and it is directed that on

furnishing a personal bond by the appellant in the sum of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five 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 /

her presence before the concerned trial Court on 20.12.2021 and on

all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in

this regard.

Let the matter be listed for final hearing in due course.

C. c. as per rules.

(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge rcp

RAMESH CHANDRA PITHWE 2021.09.02 19:20:38 +05'30'