Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puranlal Kurmi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 May, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 2473 of 2024
(PURANLAL KURMI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 24-05-2024
Shri Suyash Mohan Guru - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.5455 of 2024, which is an application for
condonation of delay.
As per office note, there is delay of 15 days in filing of this appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an
affidavit of the brother of the applicant, as the delay has been sufficiently
explained and appears to be bonafide, therefore, the application is allowed.
Delay is condoned.
Heard on admission.
The appeal is admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A. No. 4648/2024, which is first application filed on behalf
of the appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
The appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under Sections 376,
506 of the Indian Panal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with
fine o f Rs.1000/- and R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.100/- respectively with
default stipulations.
The counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not properly
appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and
committed error while convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offence. It is
submitted that the trial Court has failed to appreciate that none of the
prosecution witnesses has fully supported the case of the prosecution and there
were so many omissions and contradictions in the statements of the witnesses.
It is also submitted that that the findings recorded by the trial Court are not
sufficient to convict the appellant for the aforesaid offences. It is submitted that
the appellant is an old aged persons of 77 years of age. He is in custody and
disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, therefore, the custodial
sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
The counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted
that the trial Court on due appreciation of evidence available on record has
rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant for the aforesaid offences. Thus,
the application is liable to be dismissed.
Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the
record.
On perusal of Paragraph 38 of the judgment of the trial Court, it reflects
that in the present case the requisition for DNA test was sent on 20.4.2020 and
the DNA report was received on 29.11.2023 i.e. after a prolong period of 3
years. Further, the prosecutrix, in Para 10 of her cross-examination stated that
the appellant was 75 to 80 years old person and was physically weak. She also
stated that when the appellant was trying to hold her, she pushed the appellant
and thereafter the appellant ran way from the spot. Dr. Sunita Tantuvay (PW-
16) in her statement stated that there was no internal or external injuries on the
person of the prosecutrix and she did not give any specific opinion regarding
commission of rape upon the prosecutrix.
Thus, considering the age of the appellant, the fact that the DNA report
was received after approximately 3 years, Para-10 of cross-examination of the
prosecutrix and also evidence of Dr. Sunita Tantuvay (PW-16), this Court
deems it to be a fit case to suspend the custodial sentence of the appellant and
to release him on bail, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case,
this application is allowed
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of appellant Puranlal Kurmi
shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his
presence before the trial Court concerned on 9.9.2024 and on such other dates
as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during pendency of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
PB
