Sarju Gond @ Babu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7144 MP

                                     1
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                             AT JABALPUR
                             CRA No. 3044 of 2022
                  (SARJU GOND @ BABU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 11-05-2022
       Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant.

       Ms. Shanti Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the objector. The victim is present in Court and is identified by her counsel. Heard on the question of admission.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Considered I.A.No.6795/2022, which is first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant-applicant.

B y the impugned judgment dated 08.03.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patan, district - Jabalpur the appellant has been convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 376 (2) (n) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for three years (Rs.1000/-); RI for four years (Rs.1,000/-); and RI for ten years (Rs.3,000/-) respectively, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. It is further contended that the appellant and the prosecutrix got married even before passing of the impugned judgment by the trial Court and they have three daughters from the said wedlock. The final disposal of instant appeal would take considerable time. Hence, prayer has been made to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and grant him bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the objector has fairly submitted that he has no objection for suspension of sentence of the appellant.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From perusal of paragraph 42 of the impugned judgment, it is apparent that the prosecutrix was present at the time of passing of the impugned judgment and stated that she got married with the appellant and there was no coercion from the appellant. She has three daughters who belong to the appellant. It was further prayed by her that the appellant may not be convicted. Today, before

this Court also the prosecutrix stated that she is residing with the family of the appellant at his residence and the sentence of the appellant may be suspended. The appellant has remained in custody from 08.09.2017 to 21.06.2017; 03.09.2019 to 09.01.2020 and from 24.02.2022 till today.

Hence, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and that final disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of appellant- Sarju Gound @ Babu shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the trial Court concerned on 07.09.2022 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

List for final hearing in due course.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE ks

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.05.11 18:14:59 IST