Govind Chakravarty vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 4781 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Govind Chakravarty vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 February, 2024

Author: Maninder S. Bhatti

Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti

                                                              1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 6311 of 2021
                                          (GOVIND CHAKRAVARTY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 19-02-2024
                                Ms. Savita Choudhary - Advocate for appellant.

                                Shri Dilip Singh Parihar - Panel Lawyer for respondent-State.

Record of the Court below is received.

Heard on I.A.No.10448/2023, which is fifth application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the

appellant. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 376 (2) (Cha) (Dha) and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation.

It is contended by the counsel for the appellant that as of now appellant has suffered incarceration of 3 years 11 months and 5 days as of now as against sentence of 10 years. The counsel contends that in the present case the testimony of prosecutrix (PW-6) is important and the same clarifies the picture that appellant and prosecutrix were in affair and proseuctrix event wanted to get married to the present appellant and prosecutrix has also unequivocally has

expressed in paragraph 5 of her testimony that she did not want to prosecute the present appellant and had no desire that appellant be convicted. It is further contended by the counsel that subsequently the marriage of the prosecutrix has been solemnized elsewhere, however, the appellant who was aged about 21 years at the time of incident is facing incarceration and almost 40% of incarceration is going to be completed.

P er contra, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the aforesaid prayer and submitted that earlier applications of the appellants have already

been considered and rejected. It is further contended by the counsel for the State as there were direct allegations against the appellant and the prosecutrix was aged about 15 years and 10 days on the date of incident which is evident from paragraph 14 of the judgment; therefore, no case for grant of bail is made out.

Heard the rival submissions and perused the case diary. On perusal of record it reflects that the prosecutrix in paragraph 5 of her testimony expressed that she was in relation with the applicant and she also wanted to get married with the appellant. Her mother had also no objection as regards the relation of the prosecutrix with the appellant. The prosecutrix has

further explained that she did not want to prosecute the appellant. The appellant at the time of commission was aged 21 years. Undisputedly there is no criminal past against the appellant and the appellant has suffered 3 years 11 months and 5 days incarceration as of now, which is approximately 40% of the conviction. Therefore, without commenting anything on the merit of the case, this Court deem it proper to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant. Accordingly, I.A.No.10448/2023 is allowed.

The execution of jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended subject to depositing the fine amount, (if not already deposited) and 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 28.05.2024 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

List the matter for final hearing in due course.

C.C. as per rules.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE

vivek