Lavish @ Kanhaiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2232 MP

1                           Cr.A.No.665/2022
                   (Lavish @ Kanhaiya Vs. State of M.P.)

Indore : Dated 17.2.2022
      Shri M.S.Chouhan, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri Pranay Joshi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.827/2022, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant.

The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 363 of IPC and sentenced to undergo four years' RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years' RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 5(L)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to undergo ten years' RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.12.2021 passed by Sepcial Judge (Children from Sexual Offences Act), Ratlam in S.T. No.100121/2015.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 27.5.2014 appellant kidnapped/abducted minor prosecutrix aged about 14 years 9 months and committed rape upon her repeatedly.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that prosecutrix (PW-2) as well as her mother (PW-1) both have admitted in their statements recorded before the trial Court that prosecutrix's age was recorded in the scholar register on the assumption and there is no certificate with regard to the birth of the prosecutrix. During ossification test her age was found in between 17 years to 19 years. Appellant and prosecutrix both have solemnized marriage and having a girl child. They are living together. Learned trial Court has committed error in holding guilty the appellant. The the trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record. 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.

(Lavish @ Kanhaiya Vs. State of M.P.)

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State has opposed prayer.

Having considered the rival submissions, material produced on record and also considering the statement of Dr.Satish Neema, who conducted ossification test of the prosecutrix, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter I.A.No. 827/2022 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, he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 21.04.2022, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

I.A.No. 827/2022 is allowed.

C.C. as per rules.

(Satyendra Kumar Singh) Judge

Patil

Digitally signed by SHAILESH PATIL Date: 2022.02.17 16:13:12 +05'30'