Madhya Pradesh High Court
Accused A vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 May, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 2590 of 2023
(ACCUSED A AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 11-05-2023
Mr. Alok Vagrecha - Advocate for the appellants No.1 & 2.
Mr. Akhilendra Singh - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Mr. Amit Jain- Advocate for objector.
Heard on I.A No.7574 of 2023, an application under Section 389(1) of
the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1
Pranjal Tripathi and appellant No.2 Anju Tripathi arising out of judgment
dated 01/12/2022 delivered in Special Case No.133/2021 by learned IIIrd
Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sagar.
The appellant No.1 has been convicted under Section 366 of the I.P.C.
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, Section
376(2)(n) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of
Rs.5000/-, Section 344 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years with
fine of Rs.1000/- and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for life with fine of Rs.5000/-, with default stipulation and appellant No.2
has been convicted under Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for 10 years with fine of Rs.5000/- and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and fine of Rs.5000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per prosecution story,
the appellant No.1 sexually assaulted /raped the victim. The statements of victim
were recorded by Court below twice. In the second statement, she did not
support the prosecution story. The victim and appellant No.1 have solemnized
marriage, this fact is recorded by the Court below in para-41 of the impugned
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
5/12/2023 1:00:25 PM
judgment and in para - 37 & 38 in her second deposition. It is further submitted
that appellant No.1 wants to reside with the victim and take care of her and
children. In a Habeas Corpus Petition No. 2827 of 2018 (Dayaram Verma
vs. State of M.P.) filed by father of victim /corpus. The corpus appeared
before this Court and apprised the Court that she has solemnized marriage with
appellant No.1 on her own volition. Thus, interference was declined by this
Court. Considering the aforesaid, it is prayed that remaining jail sentence of the
appellants may be suspended.
Learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer on the basis of
objection. However, counsel for objector submits that he has no objection if
sentence of appellants is suspended.
We have heard the parties at length and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any
conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of appellants. Accordingly, I.A No. 7574 of 2023 is
allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of appellant No.1 Pranjal Tripathi and appellant
No.2 Anju Tripathi is hereby suspended and it is directed that these appellants
be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety
of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to
appear before the trial Court, Sagar on 24th July, 2023 and also on such
other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this regard during the pendency
of this appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Certified copy as per rules.
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
5/12/2023 1:00:25 PM
(SUJOY PAUL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
manju
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
5/12/2023 1:00:25 PM
