Madhya Pradesh High Court
Irshad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 11134 of 2019
(IRSHAD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-02-2024
Ms. Nikita Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.16691 of 2023, an application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant- Irshad.
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 376(3) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years withe a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5/11/2019
passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Second Additional Sessions Judge,
Guna, District Guna in Special Case No.108/2018.
The present appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of 5 years and 3
months as submitted by learned counsel for the appellant.
As per prosecution story, on 25/08/2018, the prosecutrix, aged about 14
years, reported to the Police Station Radhogarh in the presence of her brother
Girraj, father Phool Singh & mother Daulatbai to the effect that she resided
along with her parents in the rest house compound and was in 8th standard.
Present appellant Irshad and his friend Ajju Khan had been stalking her from
April, 2018 and harassing her with bad intention. This fact was disclosed by her
to her mother Daulatbai. Whereafter she started living in the house situated at
Sada. From 20/08/2018, she had been residing in the rest house. On
25/08/2018, at about 11:45 when she was going to fetch vermillion from her aunt
behind her house, in the way, Irshad and Ajju got her to the house situated near
the house of her aunt where Irshad committed rape while the Ajju was standing
outside the door and keeping an eye on people. When she screamed, Irshad
pressed her mouth and threatened her for dire consequences. When her aunt
listened to it, she also started screaming and Ranveer, the friend of her brother
who was getting constructed house called her brother Girraj on phone to whom
approaching, accused fled away therefrom. On such information, FIR was
registered and investigation was set in motion. Upon completion of investigation
including recording of statements, collection of evidence and necessary
formalities, challan was filed. The Special Court, on appreciation of evidence
placed on record, convicted and sentenced the present appellant as mentioned
above.
Learned counsel for appellants while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Special Court
has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is submitted that the present
appellant has falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted
that present appellant has so far undergone incarceration of 5 years and 3
months. It is further submitted that the appeal being of 2019 is not likely to be
decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel submits that the
present appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court is not
inclined to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
present appellant on merits, however, regard being had to the only fact that
present appellant so far has already undergone incarceration of 5 years & 3
months coupled with the fact that the appeal which is of the year 2019 is not
likely to be decided in the near future, we are of the view that present appellant
is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.16691 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed
that the jail sentence of present appellant-Irshad shall remain suspended
during pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject
to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and 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, with
following further conditions:-
( 1 ) that appellant shall not move in the vicinity where
prosecutrix resides or cause any threat to life, liberty and privacy of
the prosecutrix/complainant or her family members else complainant
shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail;
(2) If the present appellant is found to be involved in any other
criminal activity either against the present complainant or anybody
else, the respondent/ State and the complainant shall be free to move
this Court for cancellation of bail.
Appellant-Irshad is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court
first on 20/05/2024 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed
in this behalf.
Accordingly, the IA 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) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2024.02.13
19:42:24
+05'30'
