Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 July, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1 Cr.A.No.1636/2019
(Ramesh Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore : Dated 19.7.2022
Shri Abhay Saraswat, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Sudhanshu Vyas, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.3461/2022, application for grant of suspension
of sentence filed on behalf of appellant.
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 363 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo three years' RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-,
under Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo ten years' RI with
fine of Rs.2,000/, under Section 376(2-I)(N) of IPC and sentenced to
undergo ten 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
19.9.2018 passed by 1st Addl.Sessions Judge, Jhabua in Special
S.T.No.88/2017.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is in
custody since 15.5.2017 and has suffered about five years one month
and 19 days incarceration, which is more than 50% of the total
sentence awarded to him. Prosecution evidence in itself is
contradictory on the point of age of the prosecutrix as per school
scholar register she was below 18 years and as per Ex.P/11 she was
above 18 years of age. It is apparent from statement of the prosecutrix
that she was consenting party as held by the trial Court. In view of the
(Ramesh Vs. State of M.P.)
aforesaid learned trial Court has committed error in holding the
appellant guilty for the aforesaid offences. 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 for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer
and submits that as per MLC report and statement of the Doctor, who
medically examined the prosecutrix she was minor as her secondary
sexual characters were not developed. As per school scholar register
she was below 18 years of age. Offences alleged against the appellant
are serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.
Having considered the rival submissions, material pointed out
by learned counsel for both the parties and the fact that appellant has
suffered about five years one month incarceration, which is more than
50% of the total sentence awarded to him, there is no likelihood of
hearing of appeal in near future, but without expressing any opinion
on merits of the case, the application I.A.No.3461/2022 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 his furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) along with solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court
(Ramesh Vs. State of M.P.)
firstly on 29.8.2022, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the
Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.3461/2022 is allowed.
List for hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(Satyendra Kumar Singh)
Judge
Patil
Digitally signed by
SHAILESH PATIL
Date: 2022.07.20
10:25:35 +05'30'
