Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deny @ Laxminarayan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 4 December, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 41 of 2017
(DENY @ LAXMINARAYAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR)
Dated : 04-12-2023
Shri Susheel Goswami - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ramadhar Choubey - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.19892/2023, sixth repeat application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
sole appellant- Deny alias Laxminarayan.
Present appellant stood convicted under Section 342 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo one year's RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, under Section
506(2) of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years RI with fine of Rs. 2,000/-
& under Section 376(2)(I) of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of Rs.
10,000/- with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 18/10/2016 passed by Special Judge (POCSO)/Fifth Additional
Sessions Judge, District Gwalior (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.60/2015.
The present appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of 7 years and 3
months.
A s per prosecution story, an FIR was lodged by the mother of the
deceased with an allegation that a day before i.e on 23/02/2015, at about 8:00, in
the evening while her daughter (prosecutrix), aged about 6 years, was
distributing prasadam had also gone to the room of the present appellant who
was the tenant in the house of complainant. After sometime, when she and her
mother-in-law heard screaming of the prosecutrix, they rushed to the room of
the present appellant which was closed from the inside. She knocked and
forcibly open the door. The prosecutrix was found weeping in the corner of the
room. Later on, she stated that appellant misbehaved with her and tried to
molest her. On the basis of such information, FIR was registered. Investigation
was set in motion. Upon completion of investigation including recording of
statements, collection of evidence and necessary formalities, challan was filed.
The Special Court on appreciation of evidence placed on record convicted and
sentenced the present appellant as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant, while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence, submits that FIR was lodged by
delay of one day. It is further submitted that mother (PW-4) and grand-mother
(PW-5) of prosecuutrix have turned hostile during her testimony in the trial
Court and belied the story of prosecution. No MLC was conducted. As such,
the impugned judgment suffers from perversity of approach being based upon
surmises and conjectures. Present appellant has falsely been implicated in the
instant case. It is further submitted that present appellant has so far undergone
incarceration of 7 years and 3 months. The appeal being of the year 2022 is not
likely to be decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel
submits that the present appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
P e r contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned. However, he fairly
submits that no MLC was conducted and that complainant (PW-4) and her
mother-in-law (PW-5) have turned hostile during their testimony in trial Court.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case but regard
being had to the fact that present appellant so far has already undergone
incarceration of 7 years and 3 months coupled with the fact that the appeal is of
the year 20217 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near
future, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, we are of the view that present
appellant is held entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.19892/2023 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant-Deny alias Laxminarayan shall remain
suspended during pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on
bail subject to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on
his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit
of fine amount.
Present Appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court
first on 19/02/2024 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed
in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE JUDGE
(Dubey)
