Omprakash vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4240 MP

1                           Cr.A.No.1073/2022
                      (Omprakash Vs. State of M.P.)

Indore : Dated 26.3.2022
      Shri Krishnapal Singh Khichi, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri R.S.Bais, learned Govt.Advocate for the respondent/State.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he was present during the trial, but on the date of judgment could not appear before the Court, therefore, sentence against him was passed on 22.1.2022, whereas co-accused Sanju was sentenced on the date of judgment i.e. 16.1.2020. Sentence of co-accuses Sanju has been suspended by this Court vide order dated 24.6.2020 passed in Cr.Appeal No.739/2020. Appellant's case is similar to that co-accused Sanju.

Heard on I.A.No.1575/2022, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant.

Appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections354, 354(A), 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three years' RI, one year, one month and five years' with fine of Rs.5,000/-, Rs.2,000/-, Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulation vide judgment dated 20.1.2022 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), District Shajapur in S.T.No.114/2018.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty so granted to him. It is further submitted that there are material discrepancies and omissions in the statement of the victim. According to the mLC report no injuries were found on the person of the victim. Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence and committed error in convicting

(Omprakash Vs. State of M.P.)

the appellant for the aforesaid offences. There are fair chances of success in the appeal. There is no possibility of early hearing of the appeal and if the sentence is not suspended, the appeal will turn infructuous. The appellant is ready to deposit the fine amount. Under these circumstances, counsel prayed for suspension of remaining jail sentence of appellant and grant of bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on bail, hence the application filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the application for suspension of custodial sentence moved on behalf of the appellant Omprakash deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1575/2022 is allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfactionof the learned trial Court, for his regular appearance before this Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence imposed against the appellant shall remain suspended till the final disposal of this appeal.

(Omprakash Vs. State of M.P.)

Appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before the Registry of this Court on 9.5.2022 and on all such subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1575/2022 is allowed. C.C. as per rules.

(Satyendra Kumar Singh) Judge

Patil

Digitally signed by SHAILESH PATIL Date: 2022.03.28 10:09:22 +05'30'