Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dhirendra Dongre vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 May, 2024
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3351 of 2024
(DHIRENDRA DONGRE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-05-2024
Shri Ahadulla Usmani - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Aditya Gupta - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.6524/2024, which is first application under Section 389
(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant.
This criminal appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. is preferred by the
appellant against the judgment dated 13.2.2024 passed by learned Special Judge
(POCSO), District Chhindwara (M.P.) in Special Case No.29/2022, whereby
appellant has been convicted under Section 363 of the IPC and sentenced to
suffer 1 year RI with fine of Rs.500/-, under Section 354 of the IPC and
sentenced to suffer 1 year RI with fine of Rs.500/-, under Section 7/8 of
POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine of Rs.500/-
, under Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to suffer 1 year RI with
fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of SC/ST of the SC/ST Act
a n d sentenced to suffer 1 year RI with fine of Rs.500/-, with default
stipulations.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that trial Court
erred in convicting the appellant and awarding the jail sentence. He submits that
out of three years of jail sentence, he suffered four months as pre and post trial
detention. He learnt the lesson hard way and would mend his ways and would
not involve in such criminal activity in future. He undertakes not to be a source
o f embarassment/harassment to the complainant side in any manner. He will
abide by all the terms and conditions as imposed by this court. Under these
grounds, counsel for appellant prayed for bail to the appellant.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and
submits that looking to the nature of allegation, which are dirty in nature, his bail
application be rejected.
Considering the submission that out of total three years of jail sentence,
he already suffered more than four months of jail incarceration and hearing of
this appeal shall take some time, therefore, this Court intends to allow the
application but in light of the judgment of Apex Court of Aparna Bhatt Vs.
State of M.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online 230, application deserves to be
allowed with certain stringent conditions, subject to deposit of fine amount, it is
directed that jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended subject to
appellant furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with one solvent surety of like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court to appear before Registry of this Court on 14/10/2024 and all
other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this regard.
1. Appellant shall not move in the vicinity of the prosecutrix and shall not
visit the village where prosecutrix resides with her family, otherwise benefit of
suspension of sentence shall immediately be withdrawn.
2. Appellant for the next six months shall not try to contact the
prosecutrix or her family members in person, through some body else or
through electronic mode.
3. Appellant shall mark his presence at Police Station Pandhurna, District
Chhindwara on first Sunday of every month during the pendency of the appeal
and in case of any misbehaviour or mischief by the appellant, victim shall be at
liberty to lodge complaint as per the mandate of Apex Court in the case of
Aparna Bhatt (supra), and police shall take prompt action in this regard.
I.A.No.6524/2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK)
JUDGE
irfan
