Madannath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 5555 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT INDORE
                            CRA No. 1367 of 2017
                    (MADANNATH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 05-04-2023
      Shri Rahul Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.774/2023, which is repeat second application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389(1) of the

Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant-Madannath.

First application of the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.09.2020.

The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 376(D) of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 20 years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.07.2017 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, 1989 District- Ujjain in S.S.T. No.86/2015.

As per prosecution case, on 05.05.2015 at around 10 p.m. the

prosecutrix went outside of her house for nature call. The present appellant and co-accused Yusuf came there and caught hold her hand and they took her in a field. She tried to cry but the accused persons have tied her mouth with her dupatta. Both the accused persons have committed rape with her thereafter, they had given threat that if she would tell the incident to someone they will kill her. After the incident the prosecutrix returned to her home and told the incident to her mother. On the next day, FIR was lodged against the present appellant and co-accused Yusuf on the basis of the information given by the prosecutrix.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has not committed any offence. He has falsely been implicated in the case. The prosecutrix was aged more than 18 years of age at the time of incident. Her statement is not supported by medical evidence. Dr. Sandhya (P.W.-4) admitted in paragraph-4 of the cross-examination that hymen may be raptured due to other reasons. Appellant is in custody at about 7 years and 6 months. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future therefore, it is prayed that the remaining jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he may be released on bail.

Per Contra, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State has

opposed the prayer of the appellant by submitting that prosecutrix has supported the case of prosecution. At the time of MLC her hymen was found raptured. Statement of prosecutrix (P.W.-1) is also supported by FSL report (Exhibit-P/18). The case is related with gangrape therefore, it is prayed that application of the appellant is liable to be rejected.

We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

Considering the statement of prosecutrix (P.W.-1) which is supported by medical evidence and FSL report (Exhibit-P/18) therefore, at this stage, we are not inclined to suspend the jail sentence and grant bail to the appellant.

Accordingly, I.A. No.774/2023 is dismissed.

                    (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                      (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
                             JUDGE                                      JUDGE

             ajit

Digitally signed by AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Date: 2023.04.06 11:42:06 +05'30'