Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pramod Kumar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 September, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 5656 of 2022
(PRAMOD KUMAR PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 26-09-2022
Shri Shailendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Yash Soni, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Alok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the objector.
I.A. No.16803/2022, second application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to the appellant is taken up. First application for suspension of
sentence was dismissed for want of prosecution.
The appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 12 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default
stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per prosecution story,
the appellant developed physical relations with the prosecutrix since 2016.
Prosecutrix is adult woman. As per the findings given in Para-52 of the
impugned judgment, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
prosecutrix came to know that appellant has solemnized marriage in March,
2020. The prosecutrix was neighbour of the appellant. She even had a talk with
the wife of the present appellant after the marriage. Thus, she was fully aware
that marriage of appellant has been solemnized in March, 2020. Thereafter, on
her own volition, she developed physical relations which by no stretch of
imagination can fall within the ambit of definition of "rape" under the IPC. By
placing reliance on (2019) AIR (SC) 4010 in the case of Pramod Suryabhan
Pawar vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another, learned counsel for
appellant submits that consent of the victim is neither based on the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KAFEEL AHMED
ANSARI
Signing time: 9/27/2022
11:32:53 AM
misconception of fact nor on the false promise made by the present appellant.
The appellant is in custody since 25.06.2022. The final hearing of this appeal
will take time, therefore, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant may be
suspended.
Shri Yash Soni, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State
opposed the prayer on the basis of objection. Shri Alok Gupta, learned counsel
for the objector also raised the objection to the prayer for suspension of
sentence.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record
and objection.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and findings given in Para-52
of the impugned judgment; without expressing any conclusive opinion on merits
of the case, we deem it appropriate to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant.
Subject to depositing the fine amount, (if not already deposited), the
execution of jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a
sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with one solvent surety of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to
appear before the trial Court, Beohari, District Shahdol on 20.12.2022 and
also on such other dates, as may be fixed by the trial in this regard.
Accordingly aforesaid IA is allowed.
(SUJOY PAUL) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
kafeel
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KAFEEL AHMED
ANSARI
Signing time: 9/27/2022
11:32:53 AM
