Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 April, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1 Cr.A.No.917/2022
(Sanjay Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore : Dated 19.4.2022
Shri S.K.Meena, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad, learned Govt.Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
The appeal is admitted for hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.1328/2022, which is an application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence.
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 366, 363
of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years' RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-,
under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC read with Section ¾ of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to undergo ten years'
RI with fine of Rs.3,000/-, with default stipulation, vide judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 14.1.2022 passed by Special
Judge (POSCO Act), Barnagar, District Ujjain in ST No.53/2020.
Prosecution case, in brief, is that appellant kidnapped/abducted
minor prosecutrix aged about 15 years four months and committed ape
upon her repeatedly.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that prosecutrix was
major at the time of incident and she voluntarily went with the appellant
as she herself admitted in her statement recorded during trial. Prosecution
has produced scholar register entry Ex.P/7 about age of the prosecutrix,
wherein her date of birth was written as 7.7.2001, while it has nowhere
mentioned that on what basis her date of birth was written at the time of
(Sanjay Vs. State of M.P.)
her admission. The aforesaid scholar register entry is of 6 th standard.
Principal of the concerned school PW-4 has specifically stated that he he
was not aware about the fact that on what basis prosecutrix's date of birth
was written in the scholar register. Prosecutrix has nowhere alleged that
she was subjected to sexual intercourse. Appellant is in custody since
14.1.2022. He was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty
granted to him. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future.
In view of aforesaid, learned counsel for the appellant prays for
suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of the bail to the
appellant.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State has opposed
the prayer and submits that offences alleged against the appellant are of
very serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Having considered the rival submissions, material produced on
record with regard to age of the prosecutrix and also considering the
statement of the prosecutrix as well as other prosecution witnesses, there
is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future, therefore, in view of
the aforesaid circumstances the application is allowed and jail sentence of
the appellant shall remain suspended.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already
not deposited, appellant shall be released on bail, on furnishing personal
bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) along with
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 13.06.2022, and
(Sanjay Vs. State of M.P.)
on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till
final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.1328/2022 is allowed.
List in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(Satyendra Kumar Singh)
Judge
Patil
Digitally signed by
SHAILESH PATIL
Date: 2022.04.19
17:01:54 +05'30'
