Shyam Sunder Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 9797 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 2391 of 2017
                                          (SHYAM SUNDER SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 28-06-2023
                                 Dr. Anuvad Shrivastava - Advocate for appellant.

                                 Ms. Pushpanjali Dwivedi - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.10196 of 2021, which is the fourth application for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.

Earlier applications were dismissed as withdrawn.

This Criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 11.04.2017 passed in S.T. No.308/2011 by the Special Judge, (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) Shahdol District Shahdol in Special Case No.95/2015, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 363, 376, 342 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and one year and three months respectively with fine of Rs. 500/-, Rs. 1,000/- and Rs/ 5000/- respectively, with default stipulations.

The application has been filed on the ground that the total punishment

period which was awarded is ten years. The appellant is in custody since 22.02.2015. He has also deposited the fine amount. Almost 80% of the sentence period has already been undergone by the present appellant. He has never been enlarged on bail. There is no likelihood of early disposal of the appeal. On this very ground, he has prayed for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, placing reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 3259 whereby the Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed for consideration of Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 6/30/2023 6:21:06 PM

the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail where the appellant has already undergone 50% of the actual sentence.

Per contra, counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the application stating therein that the age of prosecutrix was 14 years at the time of commission of offence. There are specific allegation against the present applicant but he could not dispute the fact that the appellant is in custody and he has not been enlarged on bail. State counsel submits that the factum of custody period will be verified by the authorities prior to releasing the appellant.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that there is no likelihood of early disposal of the appeal in near

future, this Court is inclined to grant bail to appellant by way of suspension of sentence. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits, I.A.No.10196 of 2021 is allowed subject to the verification of the fact that the appellant has undergone 80% of the sentence period as argued by the appellant's counsel; and it is directed that the remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court concerned for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 28.11.2023 and thereafter on such other dates as may directed by the Registry of this Court in this regard.

List the matter for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

AM

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 6/30/2023 6:21:06 PM

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 6/30/2023 6:21:06 PM