Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dashrath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6276 of 2021
(DASHRATH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-06-2022
Shri G.S. Patidar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Shaswat Seth, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A.No.27531/2021, which is an application filed under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of
the appellant - Dashrath.
Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section
363, 366 & 376(2)(i) & 376(2)(n) of IPC and further convicted u/s 5/6
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to undergo
RI for 4 years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, RI for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-,
RI for 10 years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, RI for 10 years with fine of Rs. 2,000/-
and RI for 10 years with fine of Rs. 2,000 with default stipulation vide judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.09.2021 passed in SC/200/2019.
Prosecution story in brief is that appellant kidnapped/abducted minor
prosecutrix aged about 15-16 years and after wrongfully confining her,
committed rape upon her repeatedly.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that prosecutrix was major at
the time of incident and she has voluntarily went with the appellant and lived
with him. It is also submitted that prosecutrix visited different places with the
Signature Not Verified
SAN appellant by public conveyance, but has never attempted to raise any alarm. He
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:45 IST further submits that prosecutrix herself stated in her statement during trial that
she was 18 years of age. Her father Bhima(PW-2) has admitted in para 1 of his
cross-examination that at the time of her admission in the school, her date of
birth was written on the basis of presumption and he has not submitted any
birth certificate about her date of birth. Hence, prosecution has not proved the
fact that prosecutrix was minor and below 18 years of age at the time of
incident. Trial Court has committed error in holding the appellant guilty for the
offences punishable u/Ss 363, 366, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5/6
of POCSO Act. Even otherwise, appellant is in custody since 09.09.2019 and
has already suffered about 2 years and 09 months of custody out of total
sentence of 10 years awarded.There is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in
near future. With the aforesaid, prayer is made for suspension of the remaining
custodial period of the appellant and grant of the bail to the appellant.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/state opposes the prayer for
suspension of remaining jail sentence with the submission that as per scholar
register entry, prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident. Hence, no case for
suspension of sentence and grant of the bail to the appellant is made out .
Having considered the statement of Bhima - father (PW-2) of the
prosecutrix , other material produced on record and also looking to the period
of custody already suffered by the appellant, this Court is of the considered
view that it is a fit case for suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter
I.A.No.27531/2021 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall remain
suspended.
I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
Signature Not Verified
SAN
deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:45 IST
of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand only) along with a solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court firstly on 13.09.2022 and on such other dates, as may
be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
C.c. as per rules.
(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:45 IST
