Madhya Pradesh High Court
Madhav Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 May, 2023
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 6053 of 2023
(MADHAV SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 18-05-2023
Shri D.S. Rajawat- Advocate for the appellant.
Shri G.S. Chauhan- Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.7919/2023, First application under Section 389 (1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the
appellant.
This appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against
t h e judgment dated 20/04/2023 passed by Special Judge (POCSO) Act,
Shivpuri, (M.P.) in S.C. No.117/2022, whereby the appellant has been
convicted under Section 9/10 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for 5 years with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.
Allegations against the appellant, in short, is that complainant/prosecutrix
along with her mother had registered an FIR stating that on 11.07.2022 at
evening time when she had gone to Bhole temple, wherein the present appellant,
who was the pujari met her and told her elder mother had forgot her tiffin in the
temple so he asked her to it along with her. He took her behind the temple in a
room and asked her to kiss him and he cut her cheeks and when she retaliated
she was threatened to not to tell about the incident to anybody. When she
returned home she told about the incident to her mother and on 14.07.2022 FIR
was lodged against the appellant. On the basis of aforesaid complaint a crime
has been registered against the appellant under the aforementioned offences.
Appellant was arrested and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted.
Thereafter, trial was conducted and appellant was convicted.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHIVANI SINGH
RAJPUT
Signing time: 19-05-2023
11:43:36 AM
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is aged 35 years
and has been falsely implicated in this case. It was also argued that the
prosecutrix had not identified him as an assailant even from his photographs.
Appellant has been wrongly convicted by the learned trial Court. The
appellant was on bail during trial and has not misused the liberty granted to him.
Appellant is the permanent resident of District- Shivpuri (M.P.) and there are
fair chances of success of this appeal. The appeal is of the year 2023 which
may take long time for its conclusion and the appellant cannot be kept in
custody for an unlimited period. Under these circumstances, the execution of
sentence be suspended and the appellant be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State opposed the bail application and prayed for rejection of this
application.
Keeping in view of the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and the fact that an early hearing of this case is not possible, I.A.
No.7919/2023 is allowed.
I t is, therefore, directed that if appellant shall deposit the entire fine
amount, if not already deposited, and furnish personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court on 4th of September, 2023 and on such subsequent
dates as may be fixed in this regard, sentence of imprisonment awarded to him,
shall remain suspended till further orders and appellant shall be released on bail.
I.A. No.7919/2023 is allowed and disposed of.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary
Signature Not Verified
compliance.
Signed by: SHIVANI SINGH
RAJPUT
Signing time: 19-05-2023
11:43:36 AM
Certified copy as per rules/directions
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
V. JUDGE
shivani
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHIVANI SINGH
RAJPUT
Signing time: 19-05-2023
11:43:36 AM
