Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dita vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 December, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6371 of 2023
(DITA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 14-12-2023
Shri Dharmendra Khanchandani, counsel for the appellant.
Shri K. K. Tiwari, Government Advocate for the State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No. 6868/2023 which is first application under Section
389 of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed by the
appellant - Dita.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 13.03.2023 passed by
the Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012),
District Jhabua (MP) in Special Case No. 30/2020 and sentenced as under :
Section 363 of IPC - 7 years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-
Section 366 of IPC - 7 years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-
Section 376(2)(n) IPC - Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/-
Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO - Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/-
Section 5(j-ll) of POCSO - Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/-
(with default stipulations)
As per the case of the prosecution, on 11.09.2019, prosecutrix who was
a minor went to school at Thandla from her village Talawali, but she did not
return. Later on, some villagers informed that appellant is also missing. On
15.09.2019, FIR was lodged about the missing of prosecutrix. During
investigation, prosecutrix was recovered after 11 months from the possession
of the present appellant. Statement of the prosecutrix were recorded wherein
she stated that the appellant enticed her on the pretext of marriage, took her to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time:
12/14/2023
4:58:22 PM
Gujarat and committed the offence with her due to which she got pregnant.
Charge-sheet was filed and appellant was implicated in the offence.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been
falsely implicated in the offence. There is contradiction with respect to the age
of the prosecutrix. She went with the appellant on her own will. They got
married, visited several places and stayed as husband and wife for about 11
months and during that period, prosecutrix never made hue and cry. During the
medical examination, no injury was found on the prosecutrix with regard to
allegation of sexual assault. Appellant is willing to live with the prosecutrix but
her parents are not allowing the prosecutrix to live him. Appeal is of the year
2023 and its final disposal will take some time. In these circumstances, prayer
is made to release the appellant on bail.
Learned Government Advocate for the State has opposed the prayer and
submitted that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of incident aged about 17
years and 7 months. She has clearly stated against the appellant. Considering
the nature of offence and period of custody, the application deserves to be
dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case,
coupled with the fact that final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future, without commenting on the merits of the case, I.A. No. 6868/2023 is
allowed and the jail sentence of the appellant is suspended.
It is directed that upon depositing the fine amount (if not already
deposited) and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial court, the substantive jail sentence of the appellant - Dita
s/o Kasan Bhabor shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal and
he shall be released on bail. He shall appear before the concerned trial Court
firstly on 22.04.2024 and on all other subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this
behalf by that Court.
I.A.No. 6868/2023 stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
vidya
