Rakesh @ Pintu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 3027 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rakesh @ Pintu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 February, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                                                1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                        CRA No. 1395 of 2021
                                        (RAKESH @ PINTU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 01-02-2024
                                 Shri Vishal Panwar - Advocate for appellant.

                                 Shri Amit Rawal - Government Advocate for respondent / State.

Heard on I.A. No.15385 of 2023, which is the second repeat application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail sentence filed on behalf of sole appellant.

2. Vide order dated 05.07.2022 this Court has dismissed as withdrawn the earlier application of appellant for suspension of jail sentence.

3. Appellant has been convicted by the impugned judgment dated 22/01/2021 passed by the Special Judge, (POCSO) Act, 2012 / Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain for commission of offence punishable under Section 376(AB) of IPC and sentenced to undergo 20 years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/- with usual default stipulation.

4. As per the prosecution story, on 23.07.2019 at about 9:30 PM, prosecutrix went to Dev Kirana Store to purchase tobacco for his father. When

she was returning to her house, at that time, present appellant called her, but she refused the same. After that appellant caught hold her and pushed her inside his house and committed rape upon her after locking the door.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. Appellant is in jail for last more than five years. Appellant is a young person of 24 years of age. This appeal is not likely to be heard finally in near future and it would take sufficient

long time. Hence, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the prayer and prays for its rejection.

7. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also taking note of the fact that this appellant committed rape upon a minor girl, who is aged about 10 years. only The DNA report is also against him and there is no dispute regarding the age of prosecutrix, which has been established by scholar register.

8. In view of the evidence available on record, we are not inclined to allow the application for suspension of sentence filed by the appellant at this stage. Hence, IA No.15385 of 2023 stands rejected.

Certified copy as per rules.

                              (VIVEK RUSIA)                                              (ANIL VERMA)
                                  JUDGE                                                     JUDGE

                           Anushree