Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sachin Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 6625 of 2022
(SACHIN YADAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 07-02-2023
Ms. Shristi Kashyap-Advocate for the appellant Nos. 2 and 4.
Shri Pramod Pandey-Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 713/2023, application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to the appellant Nos.2 and 4- Manish Thakur and Sanjay
Yadav arising out of judgment dated 16.07.2022 delivered in Special SCATR
No. 42/2019 by 4th Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge POCSO Act),
Narsinghpur, Distt. Narsinghpur is taken up.
T h e appellant Nos. 2 and 4 have been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 366 and 376(DA) of IPC and under Section 6 r/w 5(g)
of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.14,000/- respectively,
with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant by taking this court to the prosecution
story and the order passed by this Court on 05-01-2023 submits that the story
of the prosecution does not inspire any confidence. This court has taken into
account the necessary details from the prosecution story and the evidence and
was kind enough to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant No. 3-
Sachin Kashyap. The present appellants are similarly situated. Thus, the
remaining jail sentence of these appellants may also be suspended.
Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent opposed the prayer on the
strength of paragraph-62 of the impugned judgment wherein, the court has
considered the FSL report Ex. P/41.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 2/8/2023
4:46:51 PM
We have heard the parties at length.
This court while granting benefit of suspension of sentence to the
appellant No. 3- Sachin Kashyap on 05-01-2023 recorded as under:-
"By taking this Court to the prosecution, learned counsel
for this appellant submits that on 18.02.2019, the father of
prosecutrix lodged a "Gum Inshan" report in Police Station-
Stationganj, Narsinghpur that his daughter went to the school to
write an examination but did not return from the school. The
Police started its investigation. On 19.02.2019, the victim was
found at railway station Narsinghpur.
Ms. Kashyap, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded (Ex. -D-
3). In the said statement, she did not depose anything against the
present appellant. The same is the case regarding her another
statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. (Ex. P-1). A
conjoint reading of these statements show that she requested her
parents to send her to Bhopal for study but, they did not agree to
the said proposition. Thus, out of anger, she on her own went to
Bhopal where she was received by father of her friend. The father
of her friend advised her to go back and therefore, after spending a
night at Bhopal, she came back to Narsinghpur on her own. The
Court's statement of victim is relied upon where she categorically
deposed that her previous statement recorded on 20th February,
2019 (Ex-P-1) is a correct statement. A combined reading of
statement (Ex. D-3), Ex.-P-1 and Court's statement clearly shows
that there is no iota of material/evidence in this statement on the
strength of which, appellant can be held guilty. In addition, the
FSL report is not in favour of the prosecution. The medical
evidence also does not support the prosecution story. No internal
or external injuries were found on the body of the victim.
Considering the aforesaid, it is submitted that without there being
any legal evidence, the Court below held the appellant as guilty for
committing offence under Section 376 (DA) of IPC, which is bad
in law. The final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future, resultantly the jail sentence of appellant may be suspended.
Shri Akhilendra Singh, learned G.A. for the State opposed
the prayer and informed that the victim has been served and he
relied on his objection.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 2/8/2023
4:46:51 PM
We have heard the parties on this aspect.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without
expressing any conclusive opinion on the merits of the case,
we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of
this appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No. 14760 / 2022 is
allowed."
So far as paragraph-62 of the impugned judgment is concerned, prima
facie, the FSL report does not support the case of the prosecution because in
the vaginal slide of victim, no human semen was found. Learned Government
counsel, on a specific query from the bench, otherwise did not dispute the
applicability of the principles of parity.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any
conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of these appellant Nos. 2 and 4. Accordingly, I.A. No.
713/2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant Nos. 2 and 4 namely- Manish Thakur
and Sanjay Yadav are hereby suspended and it is directed that the appellants
be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety
each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a further
direction to appear before the trial Court, Narsinghpur on 17th April, 2023
and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard
during the pendency of this appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 2/8/2023
4:46:51 PM
PG
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 2/8/2023
4:46:51 PM
