Roopsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8158 MP

                                                                        1
                                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                               AT INDORE
                                                                CRA No. 1707 of 2022
                                                         (ROOPSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    Dated : 21-06-2022
                                          Shri Manoj Saxena, learned counsel for the Petitioner .

                                          Shri     Geetanjali   Chourasia,     learned    Govt.Advocate    for   the
                                    respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A.No.2534/2022, which is an application under Section

389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant - Roopsingh.

The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Sections 354 and 452 and sentenced him to undergo 1 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and 3 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 9(M)/10 and 9(N)/10 of POCSO Act and sentenced him to 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.03.2020 passed by 1st District and Sessions Judge & Special Judge(POCSO Act), Rajgarh District Rajgarh in S.T.No.343/2018.

Learned counsel for the appellant referring statement of the prosecutrix submits that prosecutrix herself admitted in her cross-examination that appellant treated her as his daughter. In para 5 of her cross-examination, she also admitted that before the police personnel lodged the report and on earlier occasion, threatened her if she will not deposed against the appellant, her Signature Not Verified SAN parents may be punished. Her statements with regard to the incident are not Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI Date: 2022.06.22 18:18:47 IST consistent. Hence, learned trial Court has committed error in holding the

appellant guilty. Moreso, appellant is in custody since 07.03.2020 which is more than 50% of total jail sentence awarded to him. There is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial. Therefore, considering the allegations alleged against him and also period of custody prays for suspension of sentence and enlargement o f appellant on bail, on such terms and conditions this Court deems fit and proper.

Per contra, learned Govt.Advocate opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence.

Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the record. Having considered the rival submissions, statement of prosecutrix

recorded during trial, period of custody which is more than 50% of total sentence awarded to him as well as there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, so also considering overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting on merits of the case, application is allowed.

It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited, appellant shall be released on bail, on 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 firstly on 20.08.2022, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

I.A.No.2534/2022 is allowed.

List for final hearing in due course.

C.C. as per rules.

Signature Not Verified SAN

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI Date: 2022.06.22 18:18:47 IST JUDGE

Vibha

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI Date: 2022.06.22 18:18:47 IST