Devendra @ Babbu Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3428 MP

                                                                        1
                                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                                CRA No. 10559 of 2022
                                             (DEVENDRA @ BABBU YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                   Dated : 27-02-2023
                                            Shri Vipin Yadav - Advocate for the appellant.

                                            Shri Y. D. Yadav - Government Advocate for the respondent - State.

Heard on the question of admission.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard on I.A. No. 21728 of 2022 which is first application filed on

behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted by the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court under Section 376 of the IPC and sentenced to R.I for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court has n o t properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record. It is vehemently contended that the age of the prosecutrix in this case is disputed. In this regard counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to the testimony of Kriparam (PW-5) who in paragraph 4 stated that

mother of the prosecutrix is an illiterate lady and she had not brought any document regarding date of birth of the prosecution and hence, the date of birth of the prosecutrix has been mentioned on the assumptions. Hence, the trial Court has erroneously relied upon the documents. It is further contended that the prosecution witnesses themselves stated the age of the prosecutrix as 21 years. Appellant is in custody and disposal of this appeal will take Signature Not Verified SAN

considerable time, therefore, the jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2023.03.03 12:52:12 IST and he may be released on bail.

Learned Government Advocate for the State has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Though the parents of the proecutrix turned hostile and stated that the prosecutrix was aged about 21 years although she was aged below 17 years at the time of the incident whereas the appellant was a married person aged about 30 years. The DNA report is also positive and in support of the prosecution case. In view of the evidence available on record and keeping in view the nature of offence, thi Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case where sentence of the appellant should be suspended at this stage.

Accordingly, I.A. No.21728 of 2022 is dismissed. List the case for final hearing in due course.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE

ks

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2023.03.03 12:52:12 IST