Sonu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15875 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sonu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                       CRA No. 6404 of 2024
                                                  (SONU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 28-05-2024
                                 Mr. Aniket Bhadoria - Advocate for the appellant.

                                 Mr. Rohit Shrivastava - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.10643 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant with an alternative prayer for grant of temporary bail as record has not been received.

The appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of

the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.05.2024 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Vidisha (M.P.) in SC No.60/2022 whereby, the appellant stood convicted under Sections 452 of IPC and Section 11(4)/12 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous maximum imprisonment of three years with maximum fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant without appreciating the evidence on merit. Further submission is that there are material omissions and contradictions in the

statement of the prosecution witnesses. Appellant was on bail during trial. He never misused the liberty granted to him during trial. Therefore, learned counsel for appellant at this stage orally prays for grant of temporary suspension of sentence and grant of bail for a limited period.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available

on record.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without commenting on merits of the case, it is directed that subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum o f Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain temporarily suspended for a period of three months from today and he be released on bail.

List the case on 08.07.2024.

Meanwhile, Registry is directed to call the record of the Court below.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

(LJ*)