Madhya Pradesh High Court
Aman @ Ram Garg vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 September, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 11157 of 2023
(AMAN @ RAM GARG Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 13-09-2023
Shri Naval Kishor Gupta- Advocate for appellant.
Dr. (Smt.)Anjali Gyanani- Public Prosecutor for respondent- State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:-
Heard on I.A.No. 16121 of 2023, first application under Section 389(1)
of CrPC moved on behalf of sole appellant- Aman alias Ram Garg for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Vide judgment dated 12th of August, 2023 passed Special Judge
(POCSO Act), District Bhind in SC ATR No.174 of 2021, appellant has been
convicted under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v) of SC and ST Act, 363, 366 of
IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act, 376(2)(n) of IPC and sentenced to undergo
two years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 3(1)(w)(i) of SC and ST
Act; life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 3(2)(v) of SC
and ST Act ; five years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 363 of IPC;
five years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 366 of IPC; twenty years RI
with fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 6 of POCSO Act; with default
stipulations as there is no separate sentence under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC.
All sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
As per prosecution story, on 17-06-2021 at around 12:00 O'clock,
grand-father of prosecutrix (PW4) along with his wife and prosecutrix aged
around 17 years were sitting in the house. At that time, prosecutrix without
informing anybody left the house and when they searched prosecutrix here and
there as well as from the relatives, whereabouts of prosecutrix could not be
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 14-09-2023
11:58:53 PM
known. Grand-father of prosecutrix gave an information about the said incident
at Nayagaon Police Station on the basis of which, Crime No.62 of 2021 was
registered. Matter was investigated and during investigation, it was found that
accused Aman used to live in the locality adjacent to the house of prosecutrix
and she knew the accused for about two years and liked him. On 17-06-2021, at
around 12:00 noon, the prosecutrix went to Bhind from her house on a tempo
without informing anyone and called accused Aman there. Thereafter, accused
and prosecutrix both went to Gwalior by a bus and got married in a temple.
From 17-06-2021 till 30-06-2021 accused and prosecutrix both lived together as
husband and wife in the house of accused at Sikandar Kampoo and accused
Aman thereafter had made physical relations with prosecutrix several times. On
30-06-2021, when prosecutrix was waiting for a bus at Mohand Tirah to go to
the house of her grandfather, police came there and brought her to police
station. After that, statement of prosecutrix was recorded, she was sent for
medical examination; and accused was arrested. After completion of
investigation, charge sheet was filed before the competent Court from where the
case was committed to Special Court for its trial. Charges were framed.
Accused while pleading his case has stated that he did not commit any offence
with the prosecutrix. Statement of accused was recorded and in his statement
he stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated and further stated
that at the time of incident, prosecutrix was above 18 years of age and wanted
to marry him but her father was not ready to get her married, therefore, a false
case has been registered against him. In his defence, accused examined Raju
Garg and Rajesh Soni as DW1 and DW2. After conclusion of trial, trial Court
convicted and sentenced the present appellant for the offence, as mentioned
above.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 14-09-2023
11:58:53 PM
It is submitted by counsel for the appellant that trial Court without
appreciating prosecution evidence as well as defence evidence, has committed
an error in convicting the appellant. It is further submitted that there is no
corroboration in the FIR, police diary statement as well as deposition of
prosecution witnesses, as there are major contradictions in prosecution
witnesses. Prosecutrix had left her house according to her own will and volition
and both prosecutrix and accused were in love and affection with each other
which appears from statements of prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and
164 of CrPC and there is no allegation of committing forcefully sexual
intercourse with prosecutrix, as they had solemnized a marriage at Gwalior and
lived as husband and wife for a period of 12-13 days, therefore, DNA test
report may be found positive and conviction of appellant cannot be made only
on the basis of only DNA report without corroboation of prosecution version.
It is further contended that appellant is in custody since 12-08-2023 and during
trial he remained in custody for a period of one month 16 days and fine amount
has already been deposited. The appeal is of the year 2023 and there is no
likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future. Hence, he prays for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, Counsel for State by supporting impugned judgment
opposed the suspension application and prayed for it rejection.
Considering the above facts and circumstances of case as well as upon
hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from
commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case
and the fact that this appeal is of year 2023 and there is no likelihood of early
hearing of appeal, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, appellant is held
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 14-09-2023
11:58:53 PM
entitled for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail. Accordingly, I.A.
allowed and it is directed that jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended
and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of trial Court and also subject to deposit of fine
amount (if not already deposited). Appellant is directed to mark his appearance
before the Registry of this Court first on 20/12/2023 and on other subsequent
dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Aforesaid IA stands closed.
Certified copy as per rules
(ROHIT ARYA) (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 14-09-2023
11:58:53 PM
