Madhya Pradesh High Court
Motu @ Mahesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 September, 2022
Author: Anjuli Palo
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 5440 of 2022
(MOTU @ MAHESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 26-09-2022
Mr. Rahul Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Geeta Yadav, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in pursuance of the order dated
19.09.2022, he has filed I.A. No.18032 of 2022 for impleadment of the complainant as
respondent No.2 in this case. Accordingly, I.A. No.18032 of 2022 is allowed. Let
necessary corrections be carried out during course of the day.
Ms. Geeta Yadav, learned Panel Lawyer submits at Bar that the complainant has
already been served.
In view of the above, the matter is taken up for admission.
The appeal seems to be arguable, hence admitted for hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.16047 of 2022, which is second application filed by the
appellant under Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
His first application (IA No.11658 of 2022 was dismissed as not maintainable
vide order dated 03.08.2022 because at that time, the appellant was not in custody.
However, the appellant has filed copy of the ordersheet of the trial Court which clearly
shows that the appellant has surrendered and now he is in custody. Hence, the present
application is maintainable.
The appellant has been convicted by the impugned judgment passed by the trial
Court for offences punishable under Sections 354 of the IPC read with Section 3 (2)
(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act;
Section 354-A read with Section 3 (2) (v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; Section 8 of the Protection of Children from
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Sexual Offences Act; and Section 3 (1) (w) (1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2022.09.27 18:18:46 IST
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years (fine
Rs.5,000/-); RI for 2 years (Rs.5,000/-); RI for 3 years (fine Rs.5,000/-) and RI for 3
years (fine Rs.5,000/-), respectively with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not
appreciated the evidence on record in proper perspective and hence arrived at
erroneous findings. There are material contradiction and omission in the testimonies
of the witnesses. As per the prosecution case itself, there is no serious allegation
against the appellant. The appellant is in custody and the final disposal of this appeal
would take considerable time, therefore, the jail sentence of the appellant may be
suspended and he may be released on bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
Looking to the nature of offence, facts and circumstances of the case as well as
the fact that disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, without commenting
on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to suspend the jail sentence of the
appellant and to release him on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of
the case, this application is allowed.
It is directed that execution of remaining jail sentence of the appellant - Motu @
Mahesh shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond in a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) with a surety
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance
before the concerned trial Court on 24.02.2023 and on such other dates as may be
fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course
(SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE
ks
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2022.09.27 18:18:46 IST
