Madhya Pradesh High Court
Naushad Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 January, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 9459 of 2022
(NAUSHAD KHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
CRA No. 10686 OF 2022
(SAIYANA SIDDIQUI ALIAS SIMMI VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 13-01-2023
Shri Prakash Kumar Gupta - Advocate for appellant in Criminal
Appeal No.9459 of 2022.
Shri Madan Singh - Advocate for appellant in Criminal Appeal
No.10686 of 2022.
Shri Suyash Thakur - Government Advocate for respondent.
Heard on I.A. No. 19915 of 2022 (in Criminal Appeal No.9459 of 2022)
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant -
Naushad Khan.
This is the first application seeking for suspension of sentence and bail
filed by accused who has been arrayed as accused No.2 before the Sessions
Court in Special Case No.53 of 2018 and has been convicted under Sections
376(2)(n)/109, 368 of the IPC and further convicted under Section 5(L)/17 of
the POCSO Act and sentenced to R.I. for 20 years, RI for 05 years and RI for
20 years respectively with fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count with default
stipulations, as mentioned in the impugned judgment.
The case of the prosecution is that the accused Nos. 1 and 3 have
committed various acts of rape against the prosecutrix. The details can be
found in the charge sheet as well as in the findings recorded by the Trial Court.
However, so far as the present appellant is concerned, the allegation
Signature Not Verified
SAN
against him is that the alleged incident took place on 05.09.2018 and the
Digitally signed by MANVENDRA SINGH
accused nos. 1 and 3 along with the victim booked a room on 13.09.2018 in
PARIHAR
Date: 2023.01.13 16:50:52 IST
Hotel Maruti at Anuppur. The hotel room was booked in the name of accused
no. 2 by providing various details such as Adhar Card etc. The entire case of
the prosecution is that since the accused no. 2 has taken care of the accused
nos. 1 and 3, he is also involved in the offence. However, whether the Trial
Court found him guilty and sentenced him along with other accused persons,
correctness of the order is the subject matter of the appeal.
However, prima facie, we are of the considered view that even if the
entire case of the prosecution is to be accepted, there is no act of rape as
alleged by the prosecution against the appellant herein. That the entire case of
the alleged offence is against the accused nos. 1 and 3. The only case made out
against the appellant is that he booked a room in the hotel in his name.
Therefore, the appellant is entitled for the bail. We are conscious of the fact that
the accused having been convicted, the allegation against him is for the offence
punishable under Sections 376(2)(n)/109, 368 of the IPC and Section 5(L)/17 of
the POCSO Act. However, keeping in mind the fact that even if the entire case
of the prosecution is believed, there is no overt act so far as the appellant is
concerned.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the
appellant was already on bail throughout the trial. Hence, on this ground, he is
entitled to be released on bail.
Consequently, I.A. No.19915 of 2022 is allowed.
Accused/appellant - Naushad Khan - is enlarged on bail subject to he
depositing the fine amounts, if not already deposited, and upon his furnishing a
Signature Not Verified
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
SAN
one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for
Digitally signed by MANVENDRA SINGH
PARIHAR
Date: 2023.01.13 16:50:52 IST
his appearance before the Trial Court/concerned Court on 08.05.2023 and
thereafter on such other subsequent dates as may be fixed in that behalf.
I.A. No. 21883 of 2022 is filed on behalf of appellant - Saiyna Siddiqui
alias Simmi in Criminal Appeal No.10686 of 2022 for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
Appellant - Saiyna Siddiqui alias Simmi has been convicted under
Sections 376(2)(n)/109 of the IPC and Section 5(L)/17 of the POCSO Act and
sentenced to R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- each under above section.
She has also been convicted and sentenced under other provisions of the IPC
with default stipulations, as mentioned in the impugned judgment.
In view of the above circumstances, we are of the prima facie view that
the Trial Court was justified in convicting the accused nos.1 and 3. The entire
case of the prosecution is against accused nos.1 and 3, who were together
during the dates when the offence of rape was committed on the victim. Hence,
we find no good ground to allow the said application.
Consequently, I.A. No.21883 of 2022 is dismissed.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
MSP/C
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by MANVENDRA SINGH
PARIHAR
Date: 2023.01.13 16:50:52 IST
