Rambabu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 15567 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                           CRA No. 2101 of 2022
               (RAMBABU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Dated : 21-09-2023
      Shri Prasoon Maheshwari- Advocate for the appellant.

      Shri Rajesh Shukla- Additional Advocate General for respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.16293/2023, which is the first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of sole appellant. Appellant so far has undergone incarceration of about 3 years.

Appellant stood convicted under Sections 366, 376(2)(i) of IPC and

under Section 3(2)(v-a) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to suffer various terms of sentences, maximum of which is 10 years R.I. with fine and default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27/12/2021 passed by Second Additional Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Vidisha in SCATR No.148/2016.

As per prosecution story, a complaint was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix that on 13/04/2012, while the mother of the prosecutrix was away on her work and her two sons (PW-2 and PW-9) were also out of house for their labour work, the prosecutrix went missing from her house as informed by

her sister-in-law (Ramsakhi Bai). Despite extensive search since prosecutrix was not recovered, a missing report was filed on 14/04/2016 at No.14/16 (Ex.P-9). Thereafter, the Crime No.123/2012 (Ex.P-8) was registered. During investigation the prosecutrix was recovered on 15/04/2016. Her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Upon completion of investigation, recording of the statement and other formalities, challan was filed. The case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial. The Sessions Court upon critical evolution of the

evidence placed before it, convicted and sentenced the present appellant as referred about.

Shri Prasoon Maheshwari, learned counsel for the appellant while seeking suspension of sentence inter alia submitted that it is a case of consent. The prosecutrix on her own volition had gone with the appellant and remained with him for more than 24 hours at different places. At no point of time she raised any alarm. It was only after lapse of two days the aforesaid FIR has been lodged. PW/9-, the brother of appellant has already turned hostile. It has also come during trial that the prosecutrix is already married and the mother also expressed her ignorance about the alleged incident. The medical evidence is

neutral and there was no DNA test. Even otherwise appellant had already suffered incarceration for more than 3 years. Appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood of appeal being taken up for final hearing under such circumstances application of appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail may be considered.

Per contra, Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Additional Advocate General while opposing the prayer, supported the judgment impugned. He contends that judgment impugned is passed upon proper evolution of evidence placed on record and the prosecutrix was 15 years and 6 months of age at the time of incident, as per the evidence placed on record. Therefore, irrespective of her consent it is a case of rape. Hence no exception thereto can be taken.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties through this Court refrain from commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the matter but regard being had to the fact that present appellant has already suffered 3 years incarceration coupled with the fact that appellant does not have any criminal antecedents and the appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood early

hearing of the appeal in near future in the obtaining facts and circumstances present appellant is held entitled for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail Accordingly, IA No.16293/2023 stands allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant-Ram Babu shall remained suspended and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 29/11/2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed of. 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.

Certified copy as per rules.

       (ROHIT ARYA)                                            (ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY)
          JUDGE                                                           JUDGE

JAI JPS/-
            Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI
            DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
            BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
            PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001,



PRAKASH
            st=Madhya Pradesh,

2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf179cec865c 7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb05b9522a, pseudonym=560BC50AD082B9BE54EE290EC8CB21 93780D8357,

SOLANKI serialNumber=8D6BC1C9FCE36623D0BD6B8072A2 D8C01433EBD48AE4F609F108CA8F8DE6B522, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2023.09.21 16:30:04 +05'30'