Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ekam @ Teekaram Thakur 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. 9139 of 2023
(EKAM @ TEEKARAM THAKUR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 27-10-2023
Smt. Indu Pandey - Advocate for appellants.
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.17112 of 2023:
2. This is the first application seeking for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail filed on behalf of appellant/accused Ekam @ Tikaram who has been
convicted for offences under Sections 366 and 376(3) of Indian Penal Code
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 20
years and fine of Rs.5000/- respectively with default stipulations vide impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.05.2022 passed by the
Fourth Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (POCSO Act), District
Narsinghpur in SC ATR No.87/2019.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the mother of the prosecutrix has
lodged a report stating therein that she was a labour. On 05.11.2018, she was
sleeping with her kids and the prosecutrix and when she woke up in the morning
she found that her daughter was missing. Thereafter, FIR came to be registered
against unknown persons. 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. Victim on her own volition left her house and
went with the present appellant. They have solemnized the marriage which is
reflected from the statements of the prosecutrix recorded u/s 161 and 164
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 31-Oct-23
12:53:49 PM
Cr.P.C. before the concerning Magistrate. She has given birth to a child. The
appellant has been convicted only on the ground that the victim was minor at
the time of commission of offence but stayed with the appellant for a period of
almost six months. Thereafter, she was recovered and the FIR was registered
against the present appellant. He is in custody since 14.07.2019. 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 pointing out the fact that the victim was minor at the time of
commission of offence but he could not dispute the fact that the prosecutrix
has remained with the present appellant for a period of almost six months
without raising any hue and cry. The factum of marriage as per the statement
could not be disputed by the counsel for the State. He has prayed for rejection
of the application.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact
that the appellant and the prosecutrix have stayed together for six months and
have performed the marriage and from their wedlock, they have a child, 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.17112 of 2023 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of the
appellant/accused shall remain suspended subject to the verification that the
amounts of fine are deposited, 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 31-Oct-23
12:53:49 PM
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
