Ameer vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 978 MP

                                   1
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                 CRA No. 3810 of 2017
                     (AMEER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 20-01-2022
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Mr.Akash Rathi, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Mr.C.L.Sethi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Considered I.A.No.970/2022, which is sixth application under section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant/applicant-Ameer.

Earlier three applications being I.A.Nos.18333/2017, 2340/2019 & 14252/2019 have been dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 25.9.2018, 08.2.2019 and 29.1.2020. Whereas, two interlocutory applications registered as I.A.No.6299/2020 and 12931/2020 have been dismissed on merits.

By the impugned judgment dated 07.9.2017 passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa in Sessions Trial No.134/2015 the appellant/applicant has been convicted for offences under sections 4 of POCSO Act & section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years and R.I. for 3 years as also fine of Rs.2,000/- and

Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record. There is reliable evidence to conclude that prosecutrix is minor. It is a case of love affair and consent between the applicant and prosecutrix. Medical evidence does not support the prosecution case. There is no injury on the person of prosecutrix. It also failed to appreciate the material contradictions. The appellant/applicant is in jail since long and out of total 7 years of rigorous imprisonment, he has already served for about 6 years. Final disposal of instant appeal would take considerable time. Therefore, prayer has been made to suspend the sentence of the appellant/applicant.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for bail. Considered the over all facts and circumstances of the case; prima facie there appears that prosecution was minor at the time of incident; earlier also the applications have been dismissed on merits by this Court and there is no changed circumstances; merely on the basis of serving substantial custody

period the sentence of appellant/applicant cannot be suspended. Hence, this Court does not find it to be a good case for grant of bail and suspension of sentence.

Accordingly, I.A.No.970/20222 stands dismissed. At this stage learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that since the appeal is of year 2017 and appellant has already served for about 6 years, therefore, this appeal be heard finally within a period of one month.

Prayer for final hearing in the facts and circumstances of the case being reasonable, is accepted.

In view of aforesaid, list the appeal for final hearing after one month.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE

RM

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RAJESH MAMTANI Date: 2022.01.24 18:24:26 IST