Raju @ Rajesh Lovewanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1410 MP

                                                               1
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT INDORE
                                                       CRA No. 10196 of 2022
                                         (RAJU @ RAJESH LOVEWANSHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 24-01-2023
                                  Shri Nilesh Dave - Advocate for the appellant.

                                  Shri   Santosh     Singh    Thakur      Dy.   Government     Advocate   for
                           respondent/State.

Heard on IA no. 15843/2022 which is an application for urgent hearing. Matter has already been taken up for hearing, therefore IA stands

disposed off as rendered infructuous.

Record of trial court has been received.

Heard on admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No. 15844/2022, which is an application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of custodial sentence on behalf of appellant â€" Raju.

The appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable under Section 366 and 376(1) of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo 3 years RI

with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and 10 years RI with fine of Rs. 10,000/- with usual default stipulation.

Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. He is in custody since 2.11.2022 i.e. the date of passing of judgment of the trial court. Looking to old pendency of the cases for consideration, final conclusion of the case would take sufficient time. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant. In view of the statement of the witnesses, offence is not established against the appellant. Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 11:21:30

Hence, the execution of the remaining part of the jail sentence be suspended and appellant be enlarged on bail.

Per contra learned counsel for the State opposes the application and prays for its rejection.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegation against the appellant and also taking note of the fact that appellant was on bail during the trial, the prosecutrix was major at the time of incident she remained in the company of appellant for a period of about 3 months and prosecutrix herself admits in her cross examination that she got married with the present appellant, FIR is about 3 months belated without any explanation, final

conclusion of the appeal will take long sufficient time, I find it is to be a fit case to suspend the custodial sentence of the appellant.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 15844 of 2022 is allowed and it is directed subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 14.6.2023 and on all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this behalf, the execution of remaining custodial part of the sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail, till final disposal of this appeal.

Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course. From perusal of the record it reveals that statement of prosecutrix (PW-

1) has been recorded by Smt. Kiran Tumrachi (Dhurve) JMFC Biaora and she has disclosed the name and other identifications of the prosecutrix along with her other details.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 11:21:30

Therefore, let a notice be issued to Smt. Kiran Tumrachi (Dhurve) JMFC Biaora to show cause as to why the name and other details of the prosecutrix have been mentioned in her statement, which is clear violation of directions of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nipun Saxena Vs. Union of India reported in (2019) 2 SCC 703 and is also in utter violation of Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 33(7) and 24(5) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The concerned JMFC is directed to submit her reply before this Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of notice.

Photocopy of the statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. be kept with the record for further reference if not already on record.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE

BDJ

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 25-01-2023 11:21:30