Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 19 January, 2022
Author: Rohit Arya
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 980 of 2015
(RAJENDRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.)
Gwalior, Dated : 19-01-2022
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Mr. Rajendra Singh Yadav, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent/ State.
Heard on IA 6611/2021, 6th application under Section 389 of CrPC
seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant
Rajendra Mahore.
Appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2)(1) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo LI with fine of Rs.25,000/- with default stipulation,vide
judgment dated 21/09/2015 passed by Trial Court in ST No. 427 of 2013.
I t is submitted by counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in
custody from 17/06/213 and he has already undergone around nine years of
jail sentence. It is further submitted that appellant's father is an old person and
the mother of appellant is also a handicapped person and there is no male
member in family to look after. The appellant is a young person, aged around
25 years. Looking to Covid-19 pandemic situation, final disposal of appeal
will take some time. Hence, considering the period of jail sentence, the
appellant may be granted suspension of sentence on the terms and conditions
as may be imposed by this Court.
Per contra, suspension application is opposed by the State Counsel
and submitted that considering nature and gravity of offence, appellant is not
entitled for grant of bail. Hence, prayed for rejection of suspension
application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned
judgment as well as record of trial Court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of case and submissions
made by learned counsel for parties, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, regard being had to the period of jail sentence suffered by
appellant, we deem it appropriate to allow the application for suspension of
sentence. Consequently, IA is allowed and it is directed that execution of jail
sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal
and he shall be released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court and also subject to deposit of
fine amount (if not already deposited), for his appearance before the Registry
of this Court on 14th March, 2022 and on further dates as may be fixed by
the Registry in this regard with the following further conditions:-
(1) Appellant will abide by terms and conditions of various circulars
and orders issued by Government of India and State Government as well as
local administration from time to time in the matter of maintaining social
distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc. to avoid proliferation of Novel
Corona Virus (Covid-19).
( 2 ) Concerned jail authorities are directed that before releasing
appellant, medical examination of appellant be conducted through jail doctor
and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of Covid-19,
then consequential follow-up action including isolation/ quarantine or any
further test required be undertaken immediately.
State Counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to all the
concerned including concerned police station for necessary information and
action.
Registry is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Court
concerned for necessary compliance.
(ROHIT ARYA) (RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE JUDGE
MKB
Digitally signed by MAHENDRA BARIK
Date: 2022.01.20 10:45:44 +05'30'
