Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pappu @ Rahul vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 April, 2023
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1639 of 2022
(PAPPU @ RAHUL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 20-04-2023
Shri Durgesh Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Bhuwan Gautam - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
The appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.1728/2023, which is first application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389(1) of the
Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant - Pappu @ Rahul.
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Sections 363, 376 and
307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for 05 years with
fine of Rs.2,000/-, Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and RI for 10
years with fine of Rs.10,000/- respectively and under Section 3 read with 4 of
POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of
Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 20.10.2021 passed by Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dharampuri,
District- Dhar in S.C. No.05/2019.
As per prosecution case, on 09.10.2018, the present appellant after
administering some poisonous substance to the prosecutrix (PW-2), the
appellant took her by motorcycle and tried to throw her in a pit. The prosecutrix
jumped from the motorcycle and got injured. The appellant also committed rape
with her.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he has not
committed the offence and has falsely been implicated in the matter. In the first
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 21-04-
2023 19:24:31
statement, which was recorded on 12.10.2018 in a form of dying declaration
(Ex.P-7), the prosecutrix has not stated anything about rape. Her statement is
also not supported by medical evidence and FSL report (Ex.P-23). As per
MLC report (Ex.P-12) and statement of Dr. Surekha Jain (PW-9), no external
injuries were found on the body of the prosecutrix, not a single injury was
found on her private part, her hymen was intact. Therefore, sole statement of
prosecutrix is not reliable. The appellant is in custody since 06.12.2018. 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 and prays for its rejection.
We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
Considering the evidences available on record against the appellant and
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, coupled with the fact that
final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future, the application I.A.
No.1728/2023 is allowed and the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain
suspended.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, appellant - Pappu @ Rahul shall be released on bail, on furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
along with solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for
his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 19.06.2023, and on
such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 21-04-
2023 19:24:31
disposal of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Shruti
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 21-04-
2023 19:24:31
