Bharat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3256 MP

                                                                        1
                                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                         CRA No. 101 of 2022
                                                          (BHARAT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   Indore, Dated : 08-03-2022
                                         Shri Nilesh Dave, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                         Ms Mamta Shandilya, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard on I.A.No.80/2022, which is an application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of the appellant

- Bharat.

Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 344 & 376(2)(n) of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for 5 years with fine of Rs.1000/- and RI for 2 years with fine of Rs. 1,000 and RI for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.12.2021 passed in S.C.139/2017.

Prosecution story in brief is that appellant kidnapped/abducted minor prosecutrix aged about 17-18 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. Prosecution has failed to prove that prosecutrix was minor or below 18 years at the time of incident as Principal of Govt. Middle School, Itawadi, P.S. Mandleshwar Distt. Khargone himself admitted in his cross- examination that when prosecutrix was admitted in VI Std. in the school, her date of birth was written on the basis school leaving certificate of Primary school she attended last. Prosecution has not produced any other document except scholar register (Ex. P-1) of the aforesaid school. It is further submitted that appellant and prosecutrix had solemnized their marriage. Documents in that regard were produced alongwith an affidavit of the prosecutrix. She in her statement recorded Signature Not Verified SAN u/S 164 of Cr.P.C. admitted the aforesaid fact. There is no likelihood of hearing of Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2022.03.09 10:35:47 IST 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 and grant of the bail to the appellant.

Having considered the statement of Ghisalal (PW-1) also the statement of

her parents, other material produced on record coupled with other facts and circumstances of the case, 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.80/2022 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 deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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.

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: 2022.03.09 10:35:47 IST