Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akshay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1 Cr.A.No.7849/2021
(Akshay Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore : Dated 9.5.2022
Shri O.P.Bihare, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad, learned Govt.Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.30016/2021, first application for grant of
suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant.
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 363 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo five years' RI with fine of Rs.3,000/-,
under Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years' RI with
fine of Rs.3,000/- and under Section 3(a)/4 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to undergo ten years' RI with
fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 30.4.2019 passed by 4 th Addl.Sessions Judge,
Dewas, District Dewas in S.T.No.172/2017.
Prosecution case, in brief, is that appellant kidnapped/abducted
minor prosecutrix aged about 17 years and committed rape upon her
repeatedly.
Learned counsel for the appellant referring to the statement of the
prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. submits that
prosecutrix was major at the time of incident. She herself stated that she
voluntarily went with the appellant. Prosecution has not produced any
document on the basis of which prosecutrix's date of birth was written as
1.1.2000 in her scholar register entry. Prosecutrix (PW-2) in para 5 of her
cross-examination stated that she was studying in other school before
(Akshay Vs. State of M.P.)
taking admission in Sarvodaya Vidyalaya, whose scholar register entry
has been produced in the matter, but scholar register of earlier school has
not been produced. Appellant is in custody since 2.11.2017 to 22.8.2017
and 3012.2018 to 5.2.2019 during trial and since 30.4.2019 i.e. date of
judgment. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. In
view of aforesaid, learned counsel for the appellant prays for suspension
of remaining jail sentence and grant of the bail to the appellant.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State has opposed
the prayer and submits that prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident.
Offences alleged against the appellant are of serious nature, therefore, he
is not entitled for bail.
Having considered the rival submissions, evidence produced on
record with regard to age of the prosecutrix, inconsistency in the
statements of the prosecutrix recorded during trial and recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and also considering other facts and
circumstances, there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future,
but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the application
I.A.No.30016/2021 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall
remain suspended.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already
not deposited, he shall be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 4.7.2022, and on
(Akshay Vs. State of M.P.)
such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final
disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.30016/2021 is allowed.
List in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(Satyendra Kumar Singh)
Judge
Patil
Digitally signed by
SHAILESH PATIL
Date: 2022.05.09
17:16:32 +05'30'
