Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankit @ Shanu Mahor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 March, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 393 of 2024
(ANKIT @ SHANU MAHOR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 05-03-2024
Ms. Nikita Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Dr.Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.1382 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant -Ankit @ Shanu Mahore.
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 366, 376(3) of IPC and
Section 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo 5 years RI with fine
of Rs.5,000/-, 20 years RI with fine of Rs.10,000/- and 20 years RI with fine of
Rs.10,000/- respectively with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 18/12/2023 passed by the Special Judge, Gwalior,
in SC Case No.91/2021.
The present appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of near about 2
years and 3 months, as submitted by learned counsel for the appellant.
In brief prosecution story is that father of the prosecutrix lodged a written
complaint at police Station Janakganj, alleging that her daughter- the prosecutrix
on 29.1.2021 at about 11.30 without informing anybody has gone somewhere.
He searched her at all possible places, but she could not be found. He raised
suspicion on appellant that he by persuading took away his daughter. On the
basis of written report, crime No.66/2021 was registered at police Station
Janakganj and matter was investigated. During investigation, on 1.3.2021
prosecutrix was recovered from Pali Rajasthan. Her statement was recorded.
She has stated that she knows the appellant for the last four years, they
developed friendship and used to talk with each other, but for the last two years
as their parents came to know about them, conversation between them was
stopped. However, again the prosecutrix used to talk with the appellant from the
mobile of her mother. On 28.1.2021 prosecutrix without informing her family
members came to Jiwajiganj, where appellant met her and he took her to Jawara
on motorcycle. At Jawara they stayed in a Guest House and from there, they
went to Pali Rajasthan and stayed in a rented room for about one month. During
this period, 2-3 times appellant made physical relations with her. Due to ill-
health of the prosecutrix appellant took her to doctor for treatment where police
caught them. Thereafter, other offences were enhanced. Upon completion of
investigation including recording of statements, collection of evidence and
necessary formalities, challan was filed. Case was committed to the Special
Court. The Special Court, on appreciation of evidence placed on record,
convicted and sentenced the present appellant as mentioned above.
Learned counsel for 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. It is
submitted that it is a matter of consent. No injury was found on her person.
Present appellant has so far undergone incarceration of near about 2 years and 3
months. It is further submitted that the appeal being of 2024 is not likely to be
decided in 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
SOODAN PRASAD 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 of about 2 years & 3 months and the appeal which is of the year
2024 is not likely to be decided in near future, in the obtaining facts and
circumstances of the case, we are of the view that present appellant is entitled
for the benefit of suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail
Accordingly, I.A. No.1382 of 2024 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant Ankit @ Shanu 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. Appellant Ankit @ Shanu shall mark his presence before the
concerned police station twice in every month.
2. Appellant shall not move in the vicinity where prosecutrix
resides or cause any threat to life, liberty and privacy of the
prosecutrix or her family members else prosecutrix shall be at liberty
to move an application for cancellation of bail.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
SOODAN PRASAD instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal
Signing time: 06-03-2024
10:28:43 AM
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
ms/-
