Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul @ Vinod vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6615 of 2019
(RAHUL @ VINOD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-02-2024
Shri Santosh Kumar Meena, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Rajwardhan Gawde, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents / State.
Heard on I.A. No.1745/2024, which is a repeat (fifth) application under
Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of sole appellant - Rahul @ Vinod S/o
Rebaram.
02. The present appellant has been convicted for commission of offences
punishable under Section 5(m)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offices Act & Section 506 - II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo 10 years' rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and 01
year's rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default
stipulations.
03. Vide order dated 11.11.2019, first application of the present appellant
was dismissed on merit, thereafter, subsequent applications were withdrawn.
Now present application is filed on the ground of period of custody.
04. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has
undergone almost half of the actual sentence. At the time of commission of
offence, the appellant was aged about 19 years. Specific defence of false
implication has been taken by the present appellant and the same has been
considered by the trial Court in paragraphs - 28, 29 & 30 of the impugned
judgment. Learned counsel further submits that there is a delay of three months
in lodging the First Information Report. The medical document has not been
found proved against the present appellant, except the fact that the hymen was
found ruptured. This is an appeal of 2019 and the same will take further 5 - 10
years for final hearing and by that the time the appellant will complete the entire
jail sentence. Hence, remaining jail sentence of the present appellant be
suspended.
05. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent / State opposes
the application by submitting that first application of the appellant was
dismissed on merit.
06. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case,
period of custody so also the fact that this is an appeal of 2019 and the same
will not come up for final hearing in near future, I deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.1745/2024 stands
allowed.
07. The execution of jail sentence of appellant - Rahul @ Vinod is hereby
suspended upon his furnishing his furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and upon depositing the fine amount
(if not already deposited) with a further direction to appear before the Registry
of this Court on 15.07.2024 and thereafter on all subsequent dates as may be
fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard.
08. By way of abundant caution, it is further directed that the appellant
will not try to approach the prosecutrix or visit her home and if any complaint is
made in this regard, this Court may consider the application for cancellation of
this order of suspension.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
Ravi
