Rahul Joshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 11323 MP

                                    1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                            CRA No. 6632 of 2022
                    (RAHUL JOSHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 20-07-2023
      Shri Raj Shrivastava - Advocate for the appellant.

      Shri    Lokendra      Shrivastava     -   Public     Prosecutor   for   the
respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.14365 of 2022, which is the first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant Rahul Joshi.

Appellant stands convicted under Sections 450, 376(1) read with Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of three years with a fine of Rs.1000/-, imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulations vide judgment o f conviction and order of sentence dated 26.07.2022 by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Shivpuri (M.P.) in Special Case No.SC/55/2021.

A s per prosecution story, an FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix on 6.12.2018 that on 28.11.2018 her parents had gone to cast vote in Gopalpur Gaon in the afternoon and she along with her elder sister was at home. At about

1:30 PM when her elder sister had gone to the shop and she was alone in the house, at that time, appellant Rahul Joshi entered in the room of her house from the rear gate. He gagged her mouth and stripped off her clothes. Thereafter, he threatened her with dire consequences if she screams or informs any person about the incident. He sexually abused her and went away. On such allegations FIR was lodged and investigation was triggered. After completion of investigation, final report was submitted. The Sessions Court upon critical

evaluation of the evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced present appellant as referred above.

Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned judgment inter alia submitted that the judgment is based on surmises and conjectures as well as perversity of approach. Learned counsel refers to paras 7 and 9 of the judgment and para 5 of the statement of PW-2, father of the prosecutrix to contend that the prosecutrix was major as on the date of alleged incident and not minor as found by the Trial Court in latter part of the judgment. That apart, the appellant is well known to the prosecutrix. It is a case of false implication. That apart the FIR is delayed as the same was filed on 6.12.2018

whereas alleged incident is of 28.11.2018 for which there is no plausible reason. The appellant has suffered jail incarceration for about one year or more, hence, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the application supporting the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of the present application.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, however, regard being had to the fact that present appellant has suffered incarceration of about 1 year, present appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, appellant is held entitled for suspension of jail sentence.

Accordingly, we allow IA No.14365 of 2022 and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 22.9.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following further conditions:-

( i) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before releasing appellant, his medical examination be conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of COVID-19, then the consequential follow up action or any further test required be undertaken immediately. If not, present appellant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order ;

(ii) violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, the IA stands allowed and disposed of.

Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.

         Certified copy as per rules


   (ROHIT ARYA)                                   (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
      JUDGE                                                JUDGE

(alok)



                 ALOK KUMAR
                 2023.07.20
                 17:09:39 +05'30'