Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh @ Rahul Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 October, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 12359 of 2022
(SANTOSH @ RAHUL TIWARI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 31-10-2023
Shri Ashish Kumar Kurmi - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.N. Gupta - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
It is informed by the learned Public Prosecutor that the victim has
been served on 12.07.2023.
2. Heard on I.A. No.2518 of 2023.
3. This is the first application seeking for suspension of sentence and bail
filed on behalf of appellant/accused - Santosh @ Rahul Tiwari who has been
convicted under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and further convicted under
Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC/ST Act and sentenced to life
imprisonment and S.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and
Rs.500/- respectively and also convicted under Section 5(1)(6) of the POCSO
Act with default stipulations vide impugned judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 15.12.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge & Ninth
Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Special Case No.270 of 2021.
4. It is the case of the prosecution that the mother of the prosecutrix lodged a
missing person's report on 14.05.2017 with regard to the fact that her minor
daughter went to the market and did not return back. She was recovered on
18.02.2018 and the appellant was taken into custody. After investigation charge
sheet was filed against the appellant. The trial commenced and after conclusion
of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned
hereinabove.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LORETTA RAJ
Signing time: 11/2/2023
5:53:38 PM
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the victim as
well as the appellant were known to each other. They have resided together for
a period of almost nine months and thereafter she was recovered. Appellant is
in custody for about 1 year 4 months. 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.
6. State counsel has vehemently opposed the application stating that she was
13 years of age at the time of the commission of the offence and has narrated
the incident in her statement, but could not dispute the fact that the victim has
resided with the present appellant for a period of nine months without raising
any objection.
7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case but without
commenting upon the merits, we deem it just and necessary to enlarge the
appellant on bail. Consequently, I.A. No.2518 of 2023 is allowed.
8. Subject to deposit of the fine amounts, the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant/accused - Santosh @ Rahul Tiwari shall remain suspended and he is
directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial
Court/concerned Court on 19.01.2024 and thereafter on such other subsequent
dates as may be fixed in that behalf.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Loretta
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LORETTA RAJ
Signing time: 11/2/2023
5:53:38 PM
