Divya @ Riya @ Diya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 19 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Divya @ Riya @ Diya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 April, 2025

Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

                                                              1                                   CRA-7964-2024
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                      CRA No. 7964 of 2024
                                          (DIVYA @ RIYA @ DIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )



                           Dated : 01-04-2025
                                 Shri Bharat Sharma advocate for the appellant.

                                 Shri Amit Raval public prosecutor for State.
                                 Shri Jitendra Bohare advocate for objector.


                                 Heard on the question of admission.

                                 Being arguable, present appeal is admitted for hearing.
                                 Heard on I.A. No. 850/2025, third application under Section 389 (1)
                           of CrPC moved on behalf of appellant- Divya @ Riya @ Diya seeking
                           suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
                                  Appellant stood convicted under Section 420 r/w Section 120B of
                           IPC, 467 r/w Section 120B of IPC, 468 r/w Section 120B of IPC and 471
                           r/w Section 120B of IPC and sentenced to undergone 3 years, 5 years, 3
                           years and 2 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/- (2 counts)
                           and Rs. 1000/- (two counts) with default stipulations vide judgment of

                           conviction and order of sentence dated 2.7.2024 passed by Vth Additional
                           Sessions Judge Dr. Ambedkar Nagar District Indore in ST No. 80 of 2018.

                                 Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that                  the impugned
                           judgment passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption, conjectures
                           and surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in convicting
                           and sentencing present appellant without appreciating the prosecution


Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUNESHWAR
DATT
Signing time: 01-04-2025
19:33:06
                                                               2                             CRA-7964-2024
                           evidence properly. There was commercial transaction between the
                           complainant and father of appellant. The complainant initially filed a
                           complaint for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable
                           Instruments Act against the father only. There was no allegation against the
                           appellant in that matter. Later, in order to create pressure, this false case is
                           lodged after period of almost two years implicating the appellant for the
                           offence alleged against her father. The appellant is implicated merely on the
                           statement that she was present at the time of payment of money to her father.
                           Learned counsel referring to evidence on record submits that the evidence of
                           complainant suffers from inconsistency and improbability. Learned counsel
                           further submits that matter has been amicably settled between the parties and
                           the complainant has proposed compromise with the appellant.

                                 Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent/State            opposes the

application and prays for its rejection.

The contentions of appellant have prima facie substance which deserve consideration on merit. The appellant remained in judicial custody from 07.07.2018 to 04.12.2018. She is undergoing sentence of imprisonment from 02.07.2024 till date. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties but without commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of remaining sentence of imprisonment of the appellant-Divya @ Riya @ Diya shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and she shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing

3 CRA-7964-2024

personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-

(1). The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited) forthwith;

(2). The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 30.6.2025 and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;

(3). The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on her behalf, on the date notified for hearing.

In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective. The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to the appellant on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].

Where the appellant does not appear on the date of her appearance before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable/ bailable warrants to secure her attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court.

The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC / section 491 of BNSS, 2023 against such appellant and their surety without

4 CRA-7964-2024

any reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].

On arrest/surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellant shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the Registry of this Court.

Accordingly, the I.A No. 850/2025 stands allowed and disposed of.

CC as per rules.

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE BDJ