Madhya Pradesh High Court
Babu @ Babulal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 October, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 2827 of 2023
(BABU @ BABULAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-10-2023
Shri Rajesh Pathak- Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Kuldeep Singh- Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
Heard o n I.A. No.18324 of 2023, second application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
First application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the
prayer after three months by this Court vide order dated 27.06.2023 in CRA
No.2827 of 2023.
Appellant stands convicted under Section 377 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo 10 years' imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and Section 5(m)/6 of
POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo 20 years' imprisonment with fine of
Rs.5,000/- with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 01.02.2023 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge,
Mungawali, District Ashoknagar in Special Case No.07/2021.
As per prosecution story, on 06.04.2020, father of the victim reported to
Police Station Sehrai, District Ashok Nagar to the effect that in the evening, his
son has told him that appellant Babu @ Bablu Lal took him inside his room and
undressing himself and the victim, committed unnatural act with him. The
appellant has also threatened him not to disclose the incident to anyone
otherwise, he will kill him. On the basis of aforesaid, FIR was registered at
Sehrai, District Ashok Nagar. After completion of investigation, charge sheet
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 12-10-2023
10:04:04 AM
was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions
Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted
and sentenced the appellant as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment submits that he has been falsely implicated in the case. As such, the
impugned judgment is based on surmises and conjecture. Moreso, appellant so
f a r has undergone more than 10 months' incarceration including remission
period. Under such circumstances, learned counsel prays for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the
application with submission that victim was minor at the time of incident, hence,
no indulgence can be given in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail to the appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, but regard being had to the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that appellant so far has suffered more than 10 months'
incarceration, I.A. No.18324 of 2023 is allowed. Accordingly, it is directed
that the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of
present appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of
factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant is directed to appear before
the Registry of this Court first on 12-12-2023 and on other subsequent dates
as may be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, I.A. No.18324 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 12-10-2023
10:04:04 AM
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE JUDGE
Avi
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 12-10-2023
10:04:04 AM
