Raju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3024 MP

                                                                                        CRA No.1618/2021
                                                    1

                    High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur
                                Bench at Indore
               Criminal Appeal No.1618/2021
Indore, Dated 03.03.2022
       Shri Mohit Pandya, learned counsel for appellant Raju s/o Tarachand

Tanwar.

       Shri Mukesh Kumawat, learned Government Advocate for the

respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh.

Heard on IA No.1197/2022, a repeat (second) application under

Section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of

jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant.

The present appellant has been convicted and sentenced by learned

Special Judge [POCSO Act, 2012], Barwaha, District Mandleshwar (MP) in

Special Sessions Trial No.59/2018 vide judgment dated 03 rd March, 2021,

as under: -

                 Conviction                             Sentence
    Section            Act       RI       Fine           Imprisonment in lieu of fine
                                         amount
      452              IPC     2 years   Rs.500/-                  2 months
   506 Part-II         IPC     2 years   Rs.500/-                  2 months
     7 r/w 8       POCSO Act   3 years   Rs.500/-                  2 months

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that his earlier application

(IA No.4977/2021) was dismissed by this Court on 04.12.2021 with a

liberty to the appellant to surrender and renew his prayer.

Counsel has submitted that the appellant has surrendered before the

trial Court on 05.01.2022, a copy of the proceeding is also placed on record.

It is submitted that the sentence awarded to the appellant is for a CRA No.1618/2021

period of three years RI; and even otherwise, the only allegation against the

appellant is that of holding hand of the victim.

Counsel for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh, on the other

hand, opposed the prayer.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the

arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties as also looking to the

allegations levelled against the appellant and the short sentence of three

years RI awarded to him, this Court is of the considered opinion that the

application for suspension of custodial sentence deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,

IA No.1197/2022 is allowed, subject to depositing the fine amount, if any,

and it is directed that on furnishing a personal bond by the appellant in the

sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with a solvent

surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for his

/ her regular appearance before concerned trial Court, the execution of the

custodial part of the sentence imposed against the appellant (s) shall remain

suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellant (s), after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his / her

presence before the concerned trial Court on 11.05.2022 and on all such

subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.

C. c. as per rules.

(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge rcp

RAMESH CHANDRA PITHWE 2022.03.03 18:35:44 +05'30'