Madhya Pradesh High Court
Siddhant @ Sonal Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 October, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-3258-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3258 of 2024
(SIDDHANT @ SONAL MISHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 03-10-2024
Shri Anil Khare - Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Tanvi Khare - Advocate
for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Arunodaya Singh - Advocate for objector.
Heard on I.A. No. 9536/2024, first application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail to the appellant Siddhant @ Sonal Mishra.
This appeal is filed being aggrieved of the judgment dated 30.01.2024
passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Rewa District Rewa in Special Case
No. 77 of 2022, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offences punishable
under Section 377 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years with fine of
Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for one year, under Section
506 Part-II of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 years with fine of Rs. 200/-
, in default of payment of fine additional R.I. for one year and under Section 3/4 of
the POCSO Act and sentence to undergo R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.200/- in
default of payment of fine additional R.I. for one year.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely
implicated on account of his alleged relationship with the mother of the
complainant after four years of the incidents. Incident is reported to be taken place
in the year, 2018, report was made in the year, 2022. It is submitted that the father
of the victim had filed application for divorce and mother of the victim was started
to live separately alongwith the present appellant then, there may be possibility to
file a false case against the present appellant in order to settle the personal score.
2 CRA-3258-2024
There is no medical examination performed on the boy. Father of the victim had a
doubt about the illicit relationship between the present appellant and the mother of
the victim.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Government Advocate and Shri Arunodaya Singh,
learned counsel for objector oppose the prayer for bail.
We have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties
and carefully gone through the records. There is delay in FIR, there are good
chances of success in appeal, 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.
Accordingly, I.A.No.9536/2024 is 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 20.12.2024 and such other dates
as may be fixed by the Trial Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail
sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be
released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
AR
