Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vidhi Ka Ulanghan Karne Wala Balak ... 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. 12010 of 2023
(VIDHI KA ULANGHAN KARNE WALA BALAK SARPARAST PITA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 14-12-2023
Shri Deependra Singh Kushwah - Advocate for appellant.
Dr. Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.20592 of 2023, first application under Section 389 (1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of sole
appellant (child in conflict with law).
Appellant stands convicted under Section 363 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 366 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section
376 (2)(n) of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to
undergo RI for 20 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- only under POCSO Act with
default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
02.08.2023 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Juvenile Court, Bhind,
District Bhind (Madhya Pradesh) in S.T.No.42 of 2021.
Appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of more than six months.
Prosecution story, as found proved, is that a missing person report was
lodged on 07.10.2020 by father of prosecutrix, a girl aged about 17 years and 3
months that some unknown person had enticed her away. During investigation,
the prosecutrix was recovered on 15.10.2020 from Soran, District Fatehpur,
whereafter it surfaced that on 07.10.2020 appellant had enticed the prosecutrix
and took her to Itawa and Aasam on false assurance of marriage where he kept
her for four days in a hotel and ravished her on various occasions. On the basis
of aforesaid, offence under Section 366, 366A, 376 (2)(n) of IPC and 5(l) read
with Section 6 of POCSO Act was registered against the appellant and charge
sheet was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board, wherefrom the case was made
over to the Special Court (under the POCSO Act) for trial treating the appellant
as normal accused. The Special Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence
placed on record convicted and sentenced the present appellant as referred
above.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Special Court
has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. He
has falsely been implicated. In fact it is a case of consent. At the time of alleged
incident, the age of prosecutrix was more than 17 years. Appellant is a
permanent resident of Bhind and there is no likelihood of his absconsion.
Prolonged custody in the company of hardened criminals would be prejudicial
to the appellant who is a young boy of 17 years and four months. It is further
submitted that the appeal being of the year 2023 is not likely to be decided early
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, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned, submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contentions touching merits of the case,
however, in the obtaining facts and circumstances regard being had to the
borderline age of the prosecutrix and the fact that present appeal being of the
year 2023 and is not likely to be decided early in the near future, the present
appellant is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, IA No.20592 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed
that the jail sentence of present appellant 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. He is
directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 14.02.2024 and
thereafter, on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
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.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
SP
SANJEEV
KUMAR PHANSE
2023.12.14
18:06:17 +05'30'
