Deepak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5977 MP

                                                                   1                            CRA-1033-2016
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                      CRA-1033-2016
                                                      (DEEPAK Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   26
                                   Jabalpur, Dated : 24-09-2021
                                        Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                        Shri Anurag Shivhare, Advocate for the appellant.
                                        Shri Pradeep Sahu, Panel Lawyer for respondent-State.

Heard on I.A. No. 2596/2021 third application for suspension

of execution of sentence awarded to the appellant and grant of bail. First application was dismissed on merit on 14.09.2017 with liberty to the appellant to renew the prayer after undergoing substantial part of the sentence imposed upon him. Second application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 16.10.2019.

The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 b y the appellant/accused against judgment dated 26.02.2016 in Session Trial No.182/2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hata, Distt.-Damoh (M.P.), whereby the

appellant stands convicted under Section 376 (1) of the I.P.C. and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and fine in the sum of Rs.2500/-, with default stipulation.

As per the prosecution case, at about 7:30 p.m. on 19.5.2001, the prosecution had gone to the field of Narendra to ease herself. At that time, the appellant reached there and in spite of resistance by the prosecutrix, raped her.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned trial Court committed grave error to convict and sentence to the appellant/accused. Learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence Signature Not Verified SAN in prospective way. Prosecutrix is grown-up lady of about 30 years.

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.09.24 17:12:03 IST 2 CRA-1033-2016 She is mother of one child. She is examined by a doctor but no injury is found on her body, so testimony of prosecutrix is not wholly reliable, so there are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. . Appellant/accused is in custody since 18.08.2015. During the trial, he remained in the

custody for some time. As per detention report received from the jail, appellant has served about 6 years 4 months jail sentence out of 10 years. This appeal is of the year 2016. It is the time of COVID-19 pandemic, due to which final hearing of this appeal will take time. There is every possibility to succeed in this appeal. Under these circumstances, if the execution of jail 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.

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

Hearing arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and this fact that first application was dismissed on merit on 14.09.2017 with liberty to the appellant to renew the prayer after undergoing substantial part of the sentence imposed upon him, appellant/accused is in custody since 18.08.2015, during the trial, he remained in the custody for some time, as per detention report received from the jail, appellant has served about 6 years 4 months jail sentence out of 10 years, prosecutrix is grown-up lady of about 30 years, she is mother of one child, she is examined by a doctor but

Signature Not Verified no injury is found on her body, this appeal is of the year 2016, it is the SAN

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.09.24 17:12:03 IST 3 CRA-1033-2016 time of COVID-19, Pandemic, 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 Deepak shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum o f 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 10.11.2021 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 appellant by the jail doctor before his release.

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 Vi ru s disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility. Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.09.24 17:12:03 IST 4 CRA-1033-2016 List this matter for final hearing in due course, as per listing policy.

C.C. as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE MISHRA

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.09.24 17:12:03 IST