Madhya Pradesh High Court
Virendra Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 October, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1350 of 2015
(VIRENDRA KOL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 27-10-2023
Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh - Advocate for appellants.
Shri Anubhav Jain - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.17758 of 2022:
2. This is the second application seeking for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant/accused Virendra Kol, who has been
convicted for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 (2) (G) of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years, R.I. for 5 years and R.I.
for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, Rs.2,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively
with default stipulations vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 01.05.2015 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi
in S.T.No.129/2013. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 22.07.2017.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the parents of the prosecutrix went for
work to Sidhi 3 to 4 months back and asked her to come Sidhi to purchase the
clothes. Thereafter, on 07.05.2013 at about 9:00 am when she was going to
Sidhi, then her uncle Ramnaresh met her near the bus stop and asked her to
drop her at Sidhi as he was going there. Thereafter, Ramnaresh told her to sit in
the Virendra's truck, who committed sexual intercourse with her and got off the
truck and thereafter Ramnesh took her with him. An FIR has been registered
against the appellants/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 appellants/accused has been convicted and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 31-Oct-23
12:53:49 PM
sentenced as mentioned hereinabove.
4. This application has been filed on the ground that the appellant herein has
been convicted for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376(2)(G) of IPC.
The prosecutrix has accompanied and boarded the truck on her own sweet will
and their was no resistance by her at the time of commission of the act.
Thereafter, she got down the truck of the appellant and boarded the truck of the
other co-accused and there also she has not raised any alarm or resisted the act.
As per prosecution story, she has made physical relationship. On being
recovered, she has levelled allegations against the present appellant and other
co-accused. The age of the prosecutrix is disputed. There is no concrete
evidence available on record regarding the age of the prosecutrix. The medical
evidence is silent regarding forceful sexual intercourse. No injuries were found
on the body of the prosecutrix. The applicant is in custody since 23.05.2023.
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.
Therefore, he has prayed for 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. She in her statement has narrated the incident and levelled allegations
against both the accused persons including the appellant but the Public
Prosecutor could not explain the circumstance that once the offence was
committed by the present appellant why she has boarded the other truck which
was being driven by other appellant and thereafter levelled allegations against
both of them. This is an unnatural conduct of the prosecutrix which could not
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 31-Oct-23
12:53:49 PM
be explained by the counsel for the State. Although, he has prayed for rejection
of the application.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and as there
is no explanation being given by the counsel for the State with regard to the fact
that once the offence was committed why she has boarded the other truck
which was being driven by other 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.17758 of 2022 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of the
appellant/accused-Virendra Kol shall remain under suspension subject to the
verification that the amounts of fine have been 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 the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
concerned for his 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
rk.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 31-Oct-23
12:53:49 PM
