Gopal @ Lala vs State Of M.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 5441 MP

                                                                             1
                                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                    AT INDORE
                                                                     CRA No. 223 of 2022
                                                              (GOPAL @ LALA Vs STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS)

                                       Dated : 13-04-2022
                                             Shri Vishal Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                             Shri Rahul Solanki, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A.No.162/2022, which is an application for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant who has been convicted by the Special Judge

(POCSO) Act, Mandleshwar in Sep.Case ARTNo.59/2017 vide judgment dated 22.12.2021, for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC, sentenced to undergo 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 366 of IPC, sentenced to undergo 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 344 of IPC, sentenced to undergo 2 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default stipulation on each count.

Prosecution story in brief is that appellant knowing the fact that prosecutrix is a member of SC/ST community and minor aged about 17 years, he abducted

and kept her captivated and committed rape upon her repeatedly.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that prosecutrix was major at the time of incident. Prosecutrix's father (PW.1) in para 31 of his cross examination has admitted that he was not aware about the date of birth of the prosecutrix and she was got admitted in the school by her mother who is no more now. Appellant and prosecutrix were having affair with each other and have solemnized their marriage, living together as husband and wife and having two kids also. Prosecutrix as well as other prosecution witnesses have not support the prosecution story even then appellant has been held guilty. Learned trial Court committed error in holding the appellant guilty. There is no likelihood of hearing of this appeal in near future. Appellant is in custody since 12.5.2017. Hence, prays that application for Signature Not Verified SAN suspension of jail sentence be allowed.

Learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State has opposed the application Digitally signed by SHAILESH MAHADEV SUKHDEVE Date: 2022.04.13 18:22:58 IST

and submits that prosecutrix was minor as per scholar register entry, but learned counsel for the complainant/objector has no objection and submitted that appellant and prosecutrix have solemnized their marriage and living together.

Having considered the rival submissions, material produced on record with

regard to the age of the prosecutrix, her statement recorded before the trial Court and also considering the other facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that final conclusion of the appeal will take considerable long time, but without commenting on merits of the case, application for suspension of jail sentence is allowed.

I t is directed that jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on 13.6.2022 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

Accordingly, I.A. stands disposed of.

C.c. as per rules.

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

SS/-

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by SHAILESH MAHADEV SUKHDEVE Date: 2022.04.13 18:22:58 IST