Ravi Jokshan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5755 MP

                                                                               1                                   CRA-1605-2020
                                                   The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                              CRA-1605-2020
                                                            (RAVI JOKSHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            5
                                            Indore, Dated : 21-09-2021

                                                 Shri Shalabh           Sharma, Counsel for the appellant-Ravi
                                            Jokshan
                                                 Ms. Gitanjali Choursiya, Counsel for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.8632/2020, first 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.

T he present appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 10.1.2020 passed by Special Judge, Jhabua in special case No. 09/2019 as under :-

In default of Convicted sentenced to Fine payment of u/s fine

363 IPC 3 years RI Rs.1000/- 1 month RI

366 IPC 10 years RI Rs.1000/- 1 year RI

376 IPC 10 years RI Rs.1000/- 1 year RI

376(2)(n) 10 years RI Rs.1000/- 1 year RI IPC

343 IPC 2 yeas RI - -

                                                            5(L)/6 of
                                                                          10 years
                                                            POCSO                  Rs.1000/-        1 year RI
                                                                          RI
                                                              Act

Learned counsel for appellant submits that although the learned trial Judge has held age of the prosecutrix to be 15 years and 7 months, however, no cogent documents are available on

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN SMT MUKTA record to prove the age of the prosecutrix except scholar register KOUSHAL Date: 2021.09.22 12:07:13 IST 2 CRA-1605-2020 of the prosecutrix and the mother of the prosecutrix, Premlata Baghel (PW-4) has also stated that she has not given birth certificate in the school to record the date of birth of the prosecutrix. Counsel has further submitted that prosecutrix was the consenting party which is also apparent from her depositions

and in the present appeal she has also given affidavit that she has no objection if the application for suspension of sentence of appellant is allowed. In these circumstances, jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.

Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

Counsel for the respondent has not appeared despite his name appears in the causelist.

Considering the fact that prosecutrix has stated that she had stayed with the appellant for about 6 days and her date of birth is also highly disputed coupled with the fact that appellant is in custody for about 2 years and final hearing of appeal will take long time, this Court is of the considered opinion t ha t the application for suspension o f custodial sentence deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, IA No.8632/2020 is allowed and it is directed that on furnishing 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 / her regular appearance before concerned trial Court, the

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by execution of the custodial part of the sentence imposed against SAN SMT MUKTA KOUSHAL Date: 2021.09.22 12:07:13 IST 3 CRA-1605-2020 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 13.12.2021 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.

Since the appeal is already admitted for final hearing, list the same for final hearing in due course.

C. c. as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE

MK

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN SMT MUKTA KOUSHAL Date: 2021.09.22 12:07:13 IST