Madhya Pradesh High Court
Umesh Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 February, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 6407 of 2022
(UMESH VISHWAKARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-02-2024
Shri Shashank Upadhyay - Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Shanti Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for respondent-State.
Record of the Court below is received.
Heard on I.A.No.17276/2022, which is an application under Section 389
(1) of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant Umesh Vishwakarma for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
T he appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned in the
impugned judgment dated 21.07.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Jatara, District Tikamgarh in S.T No. 56/2019.
It is contended by the counsel that in the present case, if the statement of
the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C and contents of paragraph 13 of her
testimony are taken into consideration, the same would reveal that it is a clear
case of consent and the present appellant has been implicated at the instigation
of the Jeth of the prosecutrix who compelled her to lodge First Information
Report against the appellant. It is contended by the counsel that the testimony
of P.W.3 is contradictory and even as per statement recorded under Section
164 Cr.P.C the demeanor of the prosecutrix were taken note of by the
Magistrate. It is thus contended by the counsel that appellant who has suffered
incarceration of 1 year seven months, be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer
and submitted that the charges have been proved beyond the reasonable doubt.
The conviction is based on the D.N.A report as the same was found to be
positive. Thus, taking into consideration the period of sentence the application
deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, it is
evident from the perusal of the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C and also paragraph 13 of her testimony, that the prosecutrix
had called the appellant to her place and when they were sitting together, Jeth of
the prosecutrix came and Jeth got annoyed and compelled the prosecutrix to
lodge F.I.R against the appellant. Thus taking into consideration the statement
of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C where demeanor of the
prosecutrix was taken note of by the Magistrate and also paragraph 13 of the
testimony of the prosecutrix, this Court deem it proper to enlarge the appellant
on bail. Accordingly, I.A.No.17276/2022 is allowed.
It is directed that the execution of the remaining jail sentence passed
agains t appellant Umesh Vishwakarma shall remain suspended during
pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail subject to depositing fine
amount, if not already deposited, and upon his furnishing personal bonds in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. fifty thousand only) with separate surety in like amount
to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on
30.05.2024 and on such further dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this
regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
vivek
