Vinay Chouhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3175 MP

                                                                         1
                                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       CRA No. 9565 of 2018
                                                        (VINAY CHOUHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   Indore, Dated : 07-03-2022
                                          Shri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                          Shri Rajesh Joshi, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

Shri Nilesh Manore, learned counsel for the complainant. In compliance of the order passed by this Court on 29.07.2021, I/O Deepak S. Yadav, Police Station Bagli Distt. Dewas is present before this Court.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State on instructions informs that due to

the Kisan Andolan, concerned Police Station caught fire and original FSL report report could not be procured as the same was also destroyed. However, he has supplied a photocopy of FSL report.

Heard on I.A.No.2095/2021, which is the second application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of the appellant - Vinay.

First application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C on behalf of the appellant Vinay was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 05.03.2019.

Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376

and 450 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 07 years and 5 years respectively with fine of Rs.5000/- and Rs. 3,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment dated 29.11.2018 passed in S.T. No. 11/2017.

Learned counsel for the appellant while criticizing the impugned judgment has made submissions that the Court below has not appreciated the evidence brought on record in right perspective.There are several material contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecutrix. Even otherwise, FSL report does not support the prosecution story. Appellant has already suffered incarceration for about five years out of total sentence of seven years awarded and 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 Signature Not Verified SAN the bail to the appellant.

Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2022.03.08 10:18:41 IST Learned counsel for the respondent/state and objector oppose the prayer

for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of the bail to the appellant.

Having considered the rival submissions, other material produced on record as well as looking to the period of incarceration of the appellant which is five years out of total sentenced of seven years awarded, 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.2095/2021 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended with stringent condition.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum 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 11.04.2022 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

Respondent/State is always free to approach this Court for cancellation of suspension of sentence, in case of any complaint received from the prosecutrix regarding threat given by the appellant, in any manner whatsoever.

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: 2022.03.08 10:18:41 IST