Madhya Pradesh High Court
Om Prakash vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 7482 of 2022
(OM PRAKASH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-02-2024
Shri R.K. Sharma - Senior Advocate with Shri V.K. Agarwal -
Advocate for the appellant.
Dr. Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.2031/2024, third application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant- Om Prakash. Earlier application for suspension of sentence
preferred by the appellant (I.A. No.7042/2022) was dismissed as withdrawn by
this Court vide order dated 25.07.2023 with liberty to revive the prayer after six
months.
Present appellant stands convicted under Section 342 of I.P.C. (three
counts) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year (on each count)
with fine of Rs.1,000/- (on each count), under Section 366-A of I.P.C. (three
counts) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for eight year (on each count)
with fine of Rs.2,000/- (on each count), under Section 376 (a) (b) of I.P.C.
(two counts) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for Life (on each count)
with fine of Rs.10,000/- (on each count), under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act (on
three counts) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years (on each
count) with fine of Rs.2,000/- (on each count) with default stipulation vide
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.07.2022 passed by
Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012) Dabra District Gwalior (M.P.) in Special
Case No.16/2020.
The appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of about 19 months, as
stated by learned counsel for appellant.
As per prosecution story, on 16.12.2019, the three prosecutrix alongwith
their respective fathers lodged a report at the Police Station Billowa, District
Gwalior to the effect that on 15.12.2019 at about 4 pm, when they were playing
near their house, at that time, the appellant came there and called them in a room
on the pretext of offering Prasad. Thereafter, the appellant started obscene
talkings with them and he tried to outrage the modesty of them and started
forcing them to take Prasad. They fled away from the room and came back to
their houses and narrated the story to their parents. The FIR was registered.
Investigation was set in motion. Upon completion of investigation including
recording of statements, collection of evidence and necessary formalities,
challan was filed and the case was committed to the Court of Special Judge for
trial. The Special Judge on appreciation of evidence placed on record convicted
and sentenced the present appellant, as aforesaid.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Court below has
not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is further submitted that the
appeal being of 2022 is not likely to be decided in the near future. It is further
submitted that initially the FIR was registered under Section 354 of IPC against
the appellant and in the statements of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161
of Cr.P.C. there was no allegation of kidnapping and rape against the appellant.
However, in the supplementary statement recorded under Section 161 of
Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix improved their earlier version and alleged kidnapping
and rape against the appellant. There are contradictions between the FIR and
statements of prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. The
appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misused the liberty granted to
him. 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 refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, regard being had to the fact that present appellant so far has undergone
incarceration about 19 months and the appeal which is of the year 2022 is not
likely to be decided in the near future and in the obtaining facts and
circumstances of the case, we are of the view that present appellant is entitled to
the benefit of suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, IA No.2031/2024, stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant 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.
Appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on
20.05.2024 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said 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) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
ojha
