Ramesh Uikey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17853 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 8873 of 2022
                                        (RAMESH UIKEY AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 26-10-2023
                                 Shri S.K. Jha - Advocate for appellants.

                                 Shri Shahrukh Riyaz- Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal seems to be arguable, it is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on IA No.23751 of 2023, which is the first application under

Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellants.

Appellant No. 1 stood convicted under Section 341 & 506 of IPC and Section 12 & 354 of POCSO Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 1 year and R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/- , Rs. 5000/- and Rs.1000/- with default stipulations respectively & appellant No. 2 stood convicted under Section 341 of IPC and Section 12 & 354 of POCSO Act and sentenced to suffer R.I.. for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/- , Rs. 5000/- with default stipulations respectively vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.09.2022 passed by

Special Judge (POCSO Act) Baihar, District Balaghat in S.T. No.SC/18/2019.

Learned counsel for the appellantS while seeking suspension of sentence inter alia submitted that the trial Court without appreciating the evidence wrongly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences. There are several omissions and contradictions in the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Appeal is of the year 2023 and there is no likelihood of appeal being taken up for final hearing. Under such circumstances, application of appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail may be considered. Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 10/27/2023 10:35:27 AM

P e r contra, learned counsel for State while opposing the prayer, supported the judgment impugned. He contends that judgment impugned is passed upon proper evaluation of evidence placed on record, so the sentence of the appellants should not be suspended.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties though this Court refrain from commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the matter and the appeal is of the year 2023 and there is no likelihood early hearing of the appeal in near future, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, present appellants are held entitled for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.

Accordingly, IA No. 23751 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed

that the jail sentence of appellants shall remained suspended and they be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellants are directed to appear before the trial Court first on 20/12/2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

List for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY) JUDGE

MISHRA

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 10/27/2023 10:35:27 AM