Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhanu Sisodiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 5530 of 2024
(BHANU SISODIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-05-2024
Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants.
Dr. Anjali Gyanani , learned AAG for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 8947/2024 which is first application filed on behalf of
appellant -Bhanu Sisodiya filed under Section 389 (1)of Cr.P.C. for suspension
of sentence.
The present appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo 20 years R.I. with fine
of Rs.10,000/- and under Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for
5 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulations vide impugned judgment
12.03.2024 passed by Special Judge POCSO Act, to the Court of Eighth
Additional Sessions Judge, District Morena in S.C. No.64/2023.
As per prosecution story, father of the prosecutrix lodged a report at
Police Station Rithorakala, Morena on 06.07.2023 against the present appellant
to the effect that his minor daughter has been eloped with the present appellant.
After 6 days, she was recovered from the custody of present appellant.
Appellant was arrested on 12.07.2023. The prosecutrix was examined by the
doctor in which no definite opinion of rape was given. The DNA was
conducted and it was not found positive. In the defense of appellant, he
produced photographs of marriage as well as certificate issued by Arya Samaj
in respect to the marriage performed by them on 07.07.2023 in which
prosecutrix disclosed her age as 18 years. The prosecutrix admitted in her
evidence about the marriage as well as the marriage certificate and she was
found to be more than 17 years of age. As per her mark-sheet, her date of birth
is 18.06.2006.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is a 25 years old
young boy. The appellant was on bail during the trial and he did not misuse the
liberty so granted to him. The appeal is of the year 2024 and final hearing would
likely to take long time, hence, remaining sentence of the appellant be
suspended.
Learned Additional Advocate General opposes the prayer and prays for
its rejection.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the
arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, final conclusion of the appeal
will still take sufficient long time, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining
custodial sentence of the present appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.8947 of
2 0 2 4 s tand s allowed. The execution of remaining jail sentence of the
appellant-Bhanu Sisodiya is hereby suspended and it is ordered that the
appellant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to depositing the fine
amount (if not already deposited) with a further direction to appear before the
Registry of this Court on 12.08.2024 and also on such other dates, as may be
fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the pendency of this
appeal.
I.A. stands disposed of.
I.A.No.8948/2024, which is an application for urgent hearing, also stands
disposed off.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Ashish*
