Madhya Pradesh High Court
Papoo @ Tulsiram Sakwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1 CRA-12612-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 12612 of 2022
(PAPOO @ TULSIRAM SAKWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 07-08-2024
Shri Rakesh Kumar Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Manoj Kushwaha - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
None for the victim despite service of notice.
Heard on I.A.No.9151 of 2024, second application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, pending
the appeal.
Appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 451
of IPC and Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- &
R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively with default stipulations vide
judgment dated 12.12.2022 passed in ST No.- 01/2022 (State of M.P. vs. Papoo @
Tulsiram) by Additional Sessions Judge, Deori, District Sagar (MP). All the
sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
Appellant's first bail application (I.A. No.25461/2022) was dismissed as
withdrawn and not pressed vide order dated 03.08.2023.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has been
erroneously convicted by learned trial Court as it has not properly appreciated the
evidence of witnesses. It is submitted that evidence of prosecution witnesses is full
of omissions and contradictions and such omissions and contradictions have not
been considered in right perspective by the learned trial Court. It is also submitted
that appellant has already suffered more than more than half of the sentence in jail.
He has fair chances to succeed in appeal. Therefore, if the execution of jail
2 CRA-12612-2022
sentence of appellant is not suspended, the purpose of filing this appeal would
become futile. Thus, it is prayed that custodial jail sentence of the appellant may
be suspended and he may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to appellant, but has candidly admitted that appellant has
undergone more than 2 years and 8 months in jail.
Having taken into consideration the facts that appellant has already
undergone more than 2 years & 8 months in jail and there is bleak possibility of
hearing this appeal in near future, I deem it proper to suspend the execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant, pending the appeal. Consequently,
I.A.No.9151 of 2024 is allowed .
It is directed that the execution of jail sentence of appellant Papoo @
Tulsiram Sakwar is hereby suspended subject to depositing the entire fine amount,
if not already deposited. It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only)
with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with
a further direction to appear before the trial Court on 27.11.2024 and also on such
other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during the pendency of
this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
@shish
3 CRA-12612-2022
