Sakdu Parte vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4702 MP

CRA No.-779-2017

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR

Criminal Appeal No.779/2017 (Sakdu Parte vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Jabalpur, dated : 01-04-2022

Shri Prakash Kumar Gupta, counsel for the appellant. Shri Ajay Shukla, Public Prosecutor for the State. I.A. No.4419/2021 is taken up.

This is the first application under Section 389(1) of CrPC for suspension of custodial sentence of applicant who stands convicted and sentenced as under:-

Conviction under Section Sentence to undergo 6 of Protection of Children from R.I. for 10 Fine of In-default- RI Sexaul Offences Act years Rs.1,000/- for 3 months

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is in jail since last 6 years. He is about 75 years of age. He is uncle of the victim and was residing in her house. The victim has admitted that she was having sexual relation with a boy Anil and the applicant was objecting for the same. He also scolded her for relation and she was annoyed by this. Therefore, it is submitted that she has implicated the applicant. The applicant is below poverty line person. He does not possess any resources and in absence of financial resources, he could not preferred appeal. Later, he has been provided services of a counsel through Legal Aid and only thereafter, he could prefer the appeal and this application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that the applicant was not competent to do sexual intercourse. During investigation, he was produced before the doctor who first opined that he was in capable to do sexual intercourse but later, inserted word "not" between words "in" and "capable", which makes the prosecution case doubtful.

4. It is also avert that the applicant in his advance age. He is not Signature SAN Not keeping well in the jail. He has been falsely implicated. There are fair Verified

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Date: 2022.04.01 17:59:48 IST

CRA No.-779-2017

chances of the applicant to succeed in appeal. The appeal would take time to be heard finally. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all the directions and conditions as may be imposed by the Court. On these grounds, prayer is made to suspend the sentence of the applicant.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further referred to paragraphs 11, 12 and 15 of the impugned judgment to bolster his contentions.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer. He referred to paragraph 12 of the impugned judgment and has prayed for dismissal of the application.

7. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.

8. On going through the facts recorded in paragraphs 11, 12 and 15 of the impugned judgment, medical report and statement of the doctor, I deem it appropriate to suspend the sentence of the applicant, therefore, without discussing the merits in detail, I.A. No.4419/2021 is allowed.

9. It is directed that on deposition of the fine amount, if not deposited so far, and also on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on 19.07.2022 and on all other subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this behalf, the execution of substantial jail sentence imposed on applicant-Sakdu Parte shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.

10. In the event of non-appearance of the appellant/applicant, the trial Court shall be at liberty to take coercive action against him to secure his presence under the intimation of this Court.

11. Let the appeal be listed for final hearing in due course.

(Virender Singh) Judge @shish