Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramkrishna Alias Gabbar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 October, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 5837 of 2019
(RAMKRISHNA ALIAS GABBAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 25-10-2023
Shri Sanjay Sharma - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Anubhav Jain - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.11981 of 2020:
2. This is the second application seeking for suspension of sentence and grant
of bail filed on behalf of appellant/accused Ramkrishna alias Gabbar who has
been convicted under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for Life and a fine of Rs.50,000/-, with
default stipulation vide judgment dated 25.06.2019 passed by the Special Judge
(Prevention of Atrocities Act), Hoshangabad in Session Trial No.400053 of
2016. His first application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated
27.08.2019.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.06.2015 at about 10:00 am, the
accused/appellant forcibly took the victim to Payga (a room in the godown) and
committed sexual intercourse with her. An FIR has been registered against the
appellant/accused. Investigation was taken up and after completion of the
investigation, charge sheet was filed. The trial commenced and after conclusion
of the trial, the appellant/accused has been convicted and sentenced as
mentioned hereinabove.
4. This application has been filed on the ground that the appellant and the
victim were known to each other. They developed physical relations on their
own volition and free will. The victim has not lodged any complaint against the
appellant for a considerable period and it is only when she developed
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 10/27/2023
12:26:04 PM
pregnancy, the matter came to the knowledge of the family members and
thereafter an FIR has been lodged. The appellant is in custody since
25.06.2019. He was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty
granted to him. There is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near
future. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be
imposed by this Court while considering the application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
contentions stating that the victim was a minor at the time of commission of
offence and consent of a minor is having no value. It is submitted that when the
victim developed the pregnancy, the offence has been registered against the
appellant. But there is no explanation which could be given by the counsel for
the State that as to why the victim kept mum for a considerable period after the
commission of offence. It is contended that the victim has supported the
prosecution story. On these grounds, he has prayed for rejection of the
application.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact
that there is no explanation being given by the victim for keeping mum for a
considerable period and looking to the custody period of the present appellant,
this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the appellant on bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
I.A. No.11981 of 2020 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of the
appellant/accused shall remain under suspension subject to the verification that
the amount of fine is deposited and he be released on bail on furnishing a bail
bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in
Signature Not Verified
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 10/27/2023
12:26:04 PM
appearance before that Court on 08.01.2024 and thereafter on such other
subsequent dates as may be fixed in that regard.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
sj
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 10/27/2023
12:26:04 PM
