Madhya Pradesh High Court
Girraj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 December, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 5426 of 2021
(GIRRAJ Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 14-12-2023
Shri Padam Singh-Advocate for appellant.
Shri Rajesh Shukla-AAG for respondent/State.
Hear d on I.A.No.6777/2023, first application for suspension of
sentence of grant of bail filed under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of
sole appellant-Girraj.
Appellant-Girraj has been convicted under section 376(2)(I)&(N) of IPC
and sentenced to suffer 15 years' R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/- and under Section
450 of IPC and sentenced to suffer five years' R.I. with fine of Rs.3,000/- with
default stipulations vide judgment dated 24.07.2021 passed by II Additional
Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Shivpuri (M.P.) in Special
Sessions Trial No.88/2018 .
Present appellant so far has already undergone about 5 years and 14 days
of actual incarceration as on 12/12/2023.
As per prosecution story, prosecutrix having lost her parents had been
living with her grand-parents in locality. While house of present appellant -
Girraj was under construction in the neighbouring area, he took advantage of
her loneliness in the house and caught hold of her hands. She was subjected to
sexual abuse and intercourse against her wish. Thereafter, since she was under
threat of dire consequences, she did not reveal the name of present appellant to
anyone. She has been subjected to sexual abuse repeatedly for over two years.
During this period, at some point of time, co-accused namely, Mukesh Sharma
is said to have caught hold of her hand with bad intention. Thereafter, she told
about the incident to her grand-father. Accordingly, case has been registered.
After collection of material evidence, challan was filed and the case was
committed to the Special Court. The Special Court upon critical evaluation of
evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced the present appellant as
referred above.
Shri Padam Singh, learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to
the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that
present appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
The Sessions Court has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in
correct perspective. The impugned judgement suffers from perversity of
approach being based on surmises and conjectures. It is further submitted that
there was a property dispute between the parties and therefore, after
unexplained long delay of 2 years of alleged incident, the said FIR was lodged.
Present appellant is the sole bread earner of the family. His family is in penury
and on the verge of starvation due to long incarceration. That apart, present
appellant has already undergone about 5 years and 14 days of actual
incarceration as on 12/12/2023. Moreso, co-accused Mukesh Sharma has
already been extended benefit of suspension of sentence by this Court on
9/11/2021 in connected Criminal Appeal No.4835/2021. It is further submitted
that the appeal being of 2021 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.
Per contra, Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned AAG appears for
respondent/State, opposes the application inter alia contending that present
appellant is the main accused who committed rape with prosecutrix who was
minor (16 years) at the time of incident and the testimony of prosecutrix has
remained unturned in cross-examination. Hence, no exception can be taken in
the matter of grant of bail to present appellant. However, learned counsel does
not dispute that the appellant has no criminal antecedents and has suffered jail
incarceration as mentioned hereinabove.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court is not
inclined to grant benefit of suspension of sentence to present appellant on
merits; however, regard being had to only fact that present appellant has already
undergone actual jail sentence of 5 years and 14 days as on 12/12/2023 coupled
with the fact that appeal which is of the year 2021 is not likely to be decided in
the near future, we are of the view that present appellant is entitled to the benefit
of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Consequently, IA.No.6777/2023 is hereby allowed and it is directed
that execution of jail sentence of present appellant-Girraj shall remain
suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail
subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two
Lacs Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine
amount (if not already deposited). Present appellant is directed to appear before
t h e Registry of this Court first on 14/02/2024 and thereafter, on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed by Registry in that regard.
Accordingly, the said I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have not bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
(Dubey)
