Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laxman Uike vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 2551 of 2015
(LAXMAN UIKE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 27-05-2024
Shri Satish Vishwakarma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Manas Mani Verma - Government Advocate for the respondent-
State.
Heard on I.A. No.4924/2020, an application under Section 389(1) of the
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant-Laxman Uike.
The appellant is aggrieved of the judgment dated 1st July, 2015 passed
b y learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Seoni in Special case No.85/2014,
whereby the appellant stands convicted for the offence under Sections 376(2)(l)
and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.25,000/- with default stipulation of 2 years Rigorous
imprisonment and six months rigorous imprisonment respectively.
I t is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has
been falsely implicated. No DNA test was performed. As per FSL report
Ex.P/23, there was no tear in the vagina. There was no external injury or
swelling in Vulva. Hymen was found to be intact. Bleeding was found to be
that of menstruation cycle as deposed by the concerned doctor. Thus, it is
submitted that it is a pure case of false implication.
Reading from the evidence of Kala Bai (PW-1), mother of prosecutrix, it
is pointed out that she has admitted that she has three daughters and one son.
One daughter died. Eldest daughter is married, her age is 24-25 years. There is
difference of two years of age amongst all the children. Son is the youngest.
Prosecutrix is elder to her son. Thus, it is pointed out that if the age is reduced,
then the age of prosecutrix will be 19-20 years. It is also submitted that the
certificate of mental insanity is after the incident, therefore, it is a a case of false
implication. It is submitted that appellant is in custody for about ten years.
Prayer is opposed by Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Govt. Advocate.
Request for suspension of fine amount made by learned counsel for
appellant is rejected.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and without commenting on
the merits of the case, we are of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to
suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail.
I.A.No.4924/2020 is accordingly allowed.
It is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited
and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on 18.12.2024 and
such other dates as may be fixed by the Trial Court, which shall not be more
than 2 times in a year, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence
imposed upon appellant Laxman Uike shall remain suspended and he shall be
released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.4924/2020 is allowed & disposed of.
This case be listed for final hearing in Part-B of the cause list as per its
turn and seniority.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
