Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manish Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 November, 2023
Author: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
Bench: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 13141 of 2023
(MANISH TIWARI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 29-11-2023
Shri Sankalp Kochar - Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Shakti Tripathi - Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1/State.
None for the respondent No.2, despite service of notice.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal seems to be arguable, hence it is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.25365/2023, which is the first application under
Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
The appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 04/10/2023 passed
b y XIV Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bhopal,
District Bhopal in S.C. No.63/2021 for the offence punishable under Sections
354 of the IPC and Section 9(M) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act and
sentenced him to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- and R.I. for
five years with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court has
wrongly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence. There are several
omissions and contradictions in the evidence adduced by the prosecution
witnesses. Proxecutrix (PW-1) has stated that she was accompanied by a friend
when she was cycling at the place of incident, but no such witness has been
produced by the prosecution who can verify the above incident. It is further
submitted that the prosecutrix (PW-1) deposed that the appellant took a video
of the alleged incident, but no such video was found on the mobile of the
appellant during investigation, which clearly indicates that the instant case is an
after thought to maliciously implicate the appellant. During trial appellant was on
bail and he never misused the liberty granted to him. The appellant is in custody
since the date of judgment i.e. 04/10/2023, hence he prayed for suspension of
jail sentence and release the appellant on bail as final hearing of this appeal will
take time.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the
prayer and prayed for dismissal of the above application.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, contention of learned
counsel for the appellant and the fact that the appellant is in custody since the
date of judgment i.e. 04/10/2023 and according to listing policy the hearing of
this appeal will take time, application is allowed and it is directed that the
execution of the remaining jail sentence passed against appellant shall remain
suspended during pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail subject to
depositing fine amount, if not already deposited and upon his furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. fifty thousand only) with one
surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance
before the trial Court on 24/01/2024 and on such further dates as may be fixed
by trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY)
JUDGE
as
