Vikram Urf Gopal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13294 MP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE CRA No. 4076 of 2023 (VIKRAM URF GOPAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 16-08-2023 Ms. Sangita Parsai, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri K. K. Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the State.

Heard on I.A.No. 4018/2023, which is first application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant

Vikram @ Gopal who stands convicted vide judgment dated 03.01.2023 passed by the Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Ratlam, District Raltam (MP) in Special Case No. 104/2021 (Crime No. 455/2021) for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 r/w 4 and 5(L) r/w 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo 20 years RI under Section 5(L) r/w 6 of the POCSO and 10 years RI under Section 366 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution case found to be proved is that on 09.08.2021, the prosecutrix aged about 15 years and her younger brother aged about 14 years

went to the farm but the prosecutrix did not return home in the evening. Therefore, her parents conducted a search and later lodged missing person report. During investigation, it was found that the appellant had taken away the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage without consent of her parents and committed repeated rape with her.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. He was aged about 19 years at the time to incident and is very poor. The final disposal of the case will take considerable Signature Not Verified Signed by: SREEVIDYA Signing time: 8/17/2023 3:09:59 PM

time. There is no likely of his absconsion, if he is released on bail. Therefore, it is prayed that the substantive jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.

4. Learned Government Advocate for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident. She was consistent in her statement under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. as well as her statement before the trial Court wherein she has specifically stated that the appellant took her along with him and committed the offence. The custody period of the appellant is also less. Hence, he prays that the application be rejected.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, custody period of the appellant, age of the prosecutrix at the time of incident as well as her statement, at this stage, we do not find any ground to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and release him on bail.

6. Accordingly, I.A.No. 4018/2023 stands rejected.

                             (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                                     (PRANAY VERMA)
                                      JUDGE                                                JUDGE

                          vidya




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/17/2023
3:09:59 PM