Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lalan Choudhary vs The State Of M.P on 8 September, 2021
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 CRA-660-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-660-2021
(LALAN CHOUDHARY Vs THE STATE OF M.P)
9
Jabalpur, Dated : 08-09-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur, Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Seema Jaiswal, P.L. for the respondent-State.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A. No.1900/2021 which is first application for
suspension of execution of sentence awarded to the appellant and grant of
bail.
Vide judgment dated 23.01.2021 in S.C. No. 22/2019 passed by
learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Distt.-Anuppur, M.P., the appellant
has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8 r/w
Section 7 of POCSO Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5
years with a fine of Rs. 4,000/-, Section 354, 354-(ka) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs. 4,000/- and
Section 457 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with a fine
of Rs. 4,000/- with default stipulation in each.
As per prosecution case, in the intervening night of 25-26/04/2015
at about 1 A.M., prosecutrix went to toilet from her house. At that time,
appellant-accused caught her. Appellant-accused tried to naked her. On
that, she cried. Then, her parents and brother reached the spot.
Thereafter, appellant-accused ran away from the spot.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant-accused
has been falsely implicated in this case. Actually, at the time of incident,
prosecutrix was above 18 years. Appellant-accused is also 24 years old.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.09.08 17:17:57 IST
2 CRA-660-2021
Both loved each other. At the time of incident, appellant was called by
the prosecutrix then he reached her house. Prosecutrix opened the door
then appellant-accused entered in her house. At that time, brother of
prosecutrix reached there. Then, appellant-accused falsely has been
implicated in this case. PW-1 mother of prosecutrix deposed before the
trial Court that appellant-accused called the prosecutrix then prosecutrix
went outside from the house. PW-2 & PW-3 are respectively brother and
father of prosecutrix. PW-2 deposed before the trial Court that at the time
of incident, he reached on the spot. Then, he saw that the prosecutrix and
appellant-accused were standing in naked condition in bathroom then he
caught appellant-accused. Same evidence is given by the PW-3 father of
the prosecutrix. So, it appears from the record that prosecution witnesses
have changed their versions from FIR and police statement. Police
statement and FIR are the basis of prosecution but all the witnesses
contradict their previous statement and they produced a new story before
the trial Court. Learned trial Court held the age of prosecutrix at the time
of incident as 17 years 8 months. There are material contradiction and
omission in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. During trial,
appellant-accused remained in jail from 26.04.2019 to 06.05.2019 and is
in jail since 23.01.2021. This appeal is of year 2021. It is the time of
COVID-19 due to which final hearing of this appeal will take time. There
is every possibility to succeed in this 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
Signature Not Verified
SAN
opposes the submission of appellant's counsel and prays for rejection of
Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.09.08 17:17:57 IST
3 CRA-660-2021
application.
Heard and perused the record.
Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for
the parties and the facts that all the main prosecution witnesses have
changed their versions from the FIR and police statement, they produced
a new story before the trial Court, appellant-accused remained in jail
during trial from 26.04.2019 to 06.05.2019 and is in jail since
23.01.2021, this appeal is of year 2021, it is the time of pandemic
COVID-19 due to which final hearing of this appeal will take time but
without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the said I.A. is
allowed.
It is ordered that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already
deposited, the execution of jail sentence of the appellant-Lalan
Choudhary shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal
and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in
the same like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his
appearance before the learned trial Court on 29.11.2021 and thereafter
on all other such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in
this regard.
In case, the appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the trial
court then the said court shall be free to issue and execute warrant of
arrest without referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of
this Court is kept informed.
Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the
following direction to the jail authority:-
1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the
Signature Not Verified
appellant by the jail doctor before his release.
SAN
Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.09.08 17:17:57 IST
4 CRA-660-2021
2 . The appellant shall not be released if he is suffering from
'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried
out.
3 . If it is found that the appellant is suffering from 'Corona Virus
disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by
placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.
List this matter for final hearing in due course, as per listing policy.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE
Pallavi
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.09.08 17:17:57 IST
