Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dipak vs The State Of M.P. Through P.S. ... on 20 September, 2023
Author: Hirdesh
--1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 7255 of 2023
(DIPAK Vs THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. PITHAMPUR)
Dated : 20.09.2023
Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri K. K. Tiwari - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Ms. Arzoo Pandit - Advocate for the respondent/complainant.
(1) Heard on IA No.12774/2023 which is the first application under Section
389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail sentence
and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant - Dipak.
(2) The appellant has been convicted by the Special Judge (POCSO Act)
Dhar in SC No.53/2022 vide judgment dated 16.05.2023 and sentenced as
under:-
Conviction Sentence
Section & Act Imprisonment Fine if Imprisonment in
deposited default of fine
363 of IPC 5 years' R.I. Rs.500/- 01 year R.I.
366 of IPC 7 years' R.I. Rs.500/- 01 year R.I.
376 (2)(n) of IPC Nil Nil Nil
5 (l)/6 of POCSO Act, 2012 20 years' R.I. Rs.1000/- 02 years' R.I.
5 (J)(ii) of POCSO Act, 20 years' R.I. Rs.1000/- 02 years' R.I.
(3) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and
has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid offence. He further submits that
the prosecutrix and appellant were known to each other prior to the incident
and they lived together. Both of them have solemnized their marriage and they
--2--
are having small child and the prosecutrix is living with her father- and
mother-in-law. The prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution story. Her
parents have admitted that the prosecutrix was 22 years old at the time of
incident but the trial Court has wrongly relied upon the date-of-birth of the
prosecutrix recorded in the scholar register. PW-4 Phool Singh, Teacher has
admitted in cross-examination that he does not know as to one what basis the
date-of-birth of the prosecutrix has been recorded in the scholar register. He
further submits that final hearing of the appeal will take a long considerable
time, hence, prays for release of the appellant on bail.
(4) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the
prayer for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection.
(5) Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of
the opinion that the jail sentence of appellant deserves to be suspended.
Accordingly, IA No.12774/2023 is allowed and it is directed that subject to
deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing of
personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty
Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
trial Court, the execution of remaining jail sentence of the appellant be
suspended till final disposal of this appeal.
(6) The appellant - Dipak after being enlarged on bail shall mark his
presence before the Trial Court on 28.12.2023 and on all such subsequent
dates which are fixed in this behalf. Accordingly, IA No.12774/2023 stands
disposed of.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI ) (HIRDESH)
N.R. JUDGE JUDGE
Digitally signed
by NARENDRA
KUMAR RAIPURIA
Date: 2023.09.20
18:47:07 +05'30'
