Madhya Pradesh High Court
Aniket @ Ankit Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 March, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 11437 of 2023
(ANIKET @ ANKIT YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 04-03-2024
Shri Akhilesh Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.22556 of 2023, first application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant- Aniket @ Ankit Yadav.
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC
and under Section 3/4 POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo RI for one year
with a fine of Rs.100/-; RI for one year with a fine of Rs.100/-; RI for twenty
years with a fine of Rs.100/-; and RI for ten years with a fine of Rs.100/- with
default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
15.06.2023 passed by Special Judge [POCSO Act], Guna (M.P.) in Special
Case No.96 of 2020.
A s per prosecution story, on 19.05.2020 at about 13:00 hours
prosecutrix, aged about 15 years resident of village Dongar, Police Station,
Vijaypur, District Guna, had gone to her friend's house for getting information
about online studies. When prosecutrix did not come back home, she was
intensely searched in the close vicinity and in relation but could not traced. On
20.05.2020, a report was got registered at Police Station Vijaypur with an
apprehension that she was taken away by an unknown person by extending
enticement and on the basis of which Crime No.58/2020 FIR was registered
under Section 363 IPC. Investigation was set in motion. During the course of
investigation, prosecutrix was recovered on 22-05-2020. 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 the present appellant while taking exception to the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the
Sessions Court has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct
perspective. The judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. On merits, it
is submitted that prosecutrix had admitted that fact that she and appellant were
known to each other and they used to talk on mobile phone. They had love
affair. On the fateful day, she had gone with the appellant to visit Shivalya
Mandir from where she eloped with the appellant as well discussed in para 25 &
26 of the impugned judgment. So far as age of the prosecutrix is concerned,
PW-2 mother of the prosecutrix in para 9 of the cross-examination has stated
that at the time of admission age of the prosecutrix was got written
approximately and the same was not actual. Besides, the appellant so far has
undergone about one and half years and the appeal being of 2023 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
as prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident as found proved by the trial
Court. Hence, prays for dismissal of the application.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case but regard being had to the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case
and the appeal which is of the year 2023 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, IA No.22556 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant Aniket @ Ankit Yadav 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Appellant Aniket @ Ankit Yadav is directed to appear before the
Registry of this Court first on 02.07.2024 and on other subsequent dates as
may be fixed in this behalf with further following conditions:-
1. Appellant shall mark his presence before the concerned police station
twice in every month.
2. Appellant shall not move to the place of resident of complainant at any
point of time. Besides, if appellant is found to be involved in any such activity
much less criminal activity causing threat to peace and tranquility in the area or
life and liberty of the complainant and others in any way, the respondent/ State
shall be at liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of his bail.
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
vc
SUNEEL
DUBEY
2024.03.05
15:54:11
+05'30'
