Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nandu @ Nandlal Makwana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 October, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
1 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A. No.1499/2022
Nandu @ Nandlal Makwana S/o Walu @ Balu Makwana and another
vs. State of M.P.
Indore : 11/10/2022 :-
Shri G.P. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant
No.1/Nandu.
Shri K.K. Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.2194/2022, which is the first application
for suspension of sentence under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. filed
on behalf of the appellant No.1/Nandu.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence under
Section 366/34, 343/34 and 376-D of IPC and sentenced to
undergo 5 years R.I., 1 year R.I. and 20 years R.I. with fine of
Rs.1,000/-, Rs.500/- and Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation
respectively by Vth ASJ, District-Ratlam vide judgment dated
21/12/2021 in Session Trial No.99/2020.
As per prosecution story, on 13/03/2020 husband of the
prosecutrix Khatu lodged a report that prosecutrix (his wife) has
gone missing since 11/03/2020. Even his children are not aware
where she has gone. According to him she had taken Rs.10,000/-,
Aadhar Card, Voter Card, Bank Pass-book etc. The report was
registered as missing person report No.94/2020 dated 09/12/2020.
2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A. No.1499/2022
Thereafter, on 20/06/2020 at 16:45 hours prosecutrix lodged a
report to the effect that these two appellants took her in a motor-
cycle forcibly and kept in the house where they committed rape
upon her repeatedly. She was taken for job as labour and also
threatened by them, therefore, she could not inform any one. After
returning to home, she narrated the incident to her husband,
thereafter immediately report was lodged.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.1 - Nandu submits that
appellant No.1 - Nandu has wrongly been convicted by the trial
Court as the allegation levelled against him is not supported by the
scientific evidence. There is an unexplainable delay in lodging the
FIR. Prosecutrix is a major lady having kids. She herself come
back to her home alongwith money, Aadhar Card etc. Appellant
No.1 - Nandu is not the habitual offender. Conclusion of trial will
take long time. It is prayed that this first application may be
allowed by suspending the jail sentence of the appellant No.1 -
Nandu.
Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence
and prays for rejection of the application.
Looking to the fact and totality of the case, considering the
arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and the fact that
3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A. No.1499/2022
there is no likelihood of early hearing of this appeal, the
application (I.A.No.2194/2022) is allowed. It is directed that the
jail sentence of the appellant No.1 - Nandu shall remain suspended
and he be released on bail upon his depositing the fine amount (if
already not deposited) and furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 12/12/2022 and on
such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry
during the pendency of this appeal.
Accordingly, (I.A.No.2194/2022) stands allowed and
disposed off.
A copy of this order be sent to Court concerned for it's
compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
Judge Judge
Aiyer* Digitally signed by
JAGDISHAN AIYER
Date: 2022.10.13
12:43:05 +05'30'
