Suresh @Tinku vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 416 MP

                                                                     1                               CRA-3242-2017
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                    CRA No. 3242 of 2017
                                                    (SURESH @TINKU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 07-01-2022
                                           Shri Rama Shankar Yadav, counsel for the appellant.
                                           Shri Vinod Mishra, learned PL for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

Appeal seems to be arguable, hence, it is admitted for final hearing. Also, heard o n I.A. No.14069/2021, application u/S.389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of the custodial sentence passed against appellant Suresh @ Tinku.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 28/6/2017 p as s ed by learned IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur, District- Chhatarpur (M.P.) in S.T. No.95/2014 whereby learned Session Judge found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 450, 376(1), 506 part 2 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 1.5 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for 1.7 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and R.I. for 1.2 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned trial Court without appreciating the evidence properly, wrongly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences. It is alleged that on 22/3/2014 applicant committed rape with the prosecutrix. Regarding incident there are many contradiction and omission in the statement of prosecutrix (PW-1). The statement of the prosecutrix do not corroborate by her MLC report. Appellant is in custody since the date of judgment i.e. 28/6/2017. Hence prayed for suspension of the jail sentence and release of the appellant on bail since the hearing of this appeal will take time.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that it is alleged that the appellant committed rape with the minor girl. Prosecutrix (PW-1) in her statement clearly deposed that the appellant committed rape with her. So, learned trial court did not commit any mistake in finding the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the application for suspension of sentence.

Looking to the statement of prosecutrix (PW-1) and the fact that her statement also corroborate by the FSL report, this Court is not inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant. Hence, the I.A. No.14069/2021 is dismissed.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified SAN

VS Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.01.07 18:44:43 IST 2 CRA-3242-2017

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.01.07 18:44:43 IST