Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ram Kishore Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-4651-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4651 of 2023
(RAM KISHORE AHIRWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 02-08-2024
Shri Sushil Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.19013 of 2023, which is first application under Section
389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of appellant-
Ramkishore Ahirwar S/o Kandhi Ahirwar.
This appeal is filed being aggrieved of the judgment dated 11.03.2023
passed by learned Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act), Panna District Panna in Sessions Case No. 15 of 2021 whereby the appellant
has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for 03 years with fine of Rs. 1000/-, under Section 366A
of IPC, sentenced to undergo RI for 05 years with fine of Rs.2000/-, under Section
342 of IPC, sentenced to undergo RI for 06 months with fine of Rs.500/- and
under Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to R.I. for life with fine of
Rs.5000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the date of birth of
the prosecutrix is mentioned in the School Record as 10.03.2004 and she eloped
with the appellant on 25.12.2020, but there is reasonable doubt in regard to the
age of the prosecutrix. Reading from the evidence of PW-2, mother of the
prosecutrix it is submitted that she has deposed about birth of 07 children. Several
of them are married. The age of the prosecutrix is suspected. PW-3 has admitted
that her age is 18 years and that of the prosecutrix age is also 18 years. It is further
2 CRA-4651-2023
submitted that PW-4 Heera Lal, Headmaster has admitted that the admission
register does not contain page number. There is no certification of total number of
pages, his signatures are not there and it is mentioned that prosectrix had taken
transfer certificate after passing 05th Class. He also admitted that number of
person mentioned at Sl. No. 762 bears the same parents name as that of the
prosecutrix whose name is mentioned at Sl. No. 763. He could not inform that
whether both of them are brother and sister or not. He admitted that date of birth of
person, whose name is mentioned at Sl. No. 762 is mentioned as 13.08.2002 and
there is cutting over that entry. It is submitted that there is reasonable doubt in
regard to the date of birth as the school admission register Ex.P-9 is having several
cutting etc.. Reading from the evidence of PW-6, it is submitted that there was no
signs of struggle. There was no injury mark external or internal. There is no FSL
or DNA report to support the case. The appellant is innocent. In her statement
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Ex.D-1) prosectrix has admitted that she has left her
home on her own volition and wants to marry with the present appellant
Ramkishore Ahirwar. Since, her age is doubtful, no conviction could have been
recorded under the provisions of POCSO Act. It is also submitted that though,
DNA report is positive, but Doctor PW-10 has admitted that the documents Ex.P-
15 and P-16 were not signed by Dr. Pawan Dwivedi in front of him and there is no
mention of drawing of blood sample (Ex.P-15). Even the name of the person
whose thumb mark was drawn is also left blank. Thus, pointing out that there are
prima facie several lacunas in the appreciation of the evidence, it is submitted that
this is a fit case to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence to the appellant.
Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the prayer
made by learned counsel for the appellant.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the
3 CRA-4651-2023
material available on record, without commenting any opinion on the merits of the
case, this Court is of the view that a fit case for suspension of sentence is made out
in favour of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No.19013 of 2020 is allowed.
It is directed that on depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited
and on furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court concerned on 30.12.2024
and on such other dates as may be fixed by the Trial Court from time to time, the
execution of remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon appellant shall
remain suspended and he be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
K.S.
