Madhya Pradesh High Court
Daku vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 June, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 3011 of 2023
(DAKU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 19-06-2023
Shri Ritu Raj Bhatnagar - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Raj Gupta - PL for the State/
____________________________________________________________
Heard on I.A. no. 2941/2023 which is an application filed under
section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C on behalf of appellant Daku for grant of bail
and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
2/ The appellant has been convicted under section 366 of IPC
and sections 5(L) /6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo ten years
R.I with fine of Rs. 1000/- ( two counts) with default stipulation.
3/ Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the
appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence.
He has solemnized marriage with the prosecutrix and at the time of the
incident, she was more than 18 years. She left her house and gone with
him with her own accord During trial and still now, the prosecutrix is
living with the appellant as his wife. During trial, he was remained on
bail and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. There is
material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the
prosecution witnesses There is strong case in favour of the appellant.
Final disposal of the appeal will take considerable long time. Under
these circumstances, he prays that the application be allowed and the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant be suspended till final disposal
of the appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 19-06-2023
17:49:55
2
4/ Learned GA for the respondent/State opposed the prayer
for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence of the
appellant by submitting that as per the scholar register, the prosecutrix
was minor at the time of the incident, therefore, his consent is
immaterial; the appellant has been properly convicted and sentenced
by the trial Court.
5/ Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case,
arguments advanced by both the parties as also taking note of the fact
that mother of the prosecutrix (PW-3) categorically admits in para 2 of
examination that the prosecutrix and the appellant have solemnized
marriage; the prosecutrix (PW-1) also categorically stated in her
statement that when she left her house, at that time, her age was about
19 years and she is living with the appellant as his wife and therefore,
she got preganent; in para 6 of examination, the prosecutrix
specifically mentioned that she is still livinig with the appellant; father
of the proseutrix in para 2 of examination admits the same fact; the
trial Court in sub-para of 38 of the impugned judgment also mentioned
that the prosecutrix and the appellant are still living as husband and
wife and final disposal of appeal is likely to take time as well as view
of the material evidence available on record, I deem it proper to
suspend the remaining jail sentence of appellant
6/ Accordingly, IA No. 2941/2023 is allowed and the
execution of remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby
suspended till the final disposal of this appeal and it is ordered that the
appellant be released on bail upon his depositing the fine amount, if
not already deposited, and upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.75,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 19-06-2023
17:49:55
satisfaction of the trial Court, with a further direction to appear before
the Registry of this Court on 11/12/2023 and on such other dates, as
may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
C.C. as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
amol
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 19-06-2023
17:49:55
