Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sachin vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 April, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRA-2194-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 2194 of 2025
(SACHIN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 02-04-2025
Shri Nilesh Manore - Advocate for the appellant./
Shri Vinod Thakur GA for the State.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on IA No. 2893 of 2025 , first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant - Sachin seeking suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
The appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under Section
354 of IPC and section 11(i) / 12 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- for each count, with
default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 17/001/2024
passed by the Special Judge (under POCSO Act), Dharampuri, Dist - Dhar (M.P.)
in SC no. 18/2023
Learned Counsel for appellant submits that learned trial Court has
committed an error in convicting the appellant for the alleged offence The
appellant is falsely implicated merely on the basis of statement of co-accused.
Learned trial Court has acquitted Rajendra and Ajay on same set of circumstances
and convicted the appellant ignoring the material contradictions and
inconsistencies in the evidence of the victim and her father. There is no likelihood
of hearing of appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 02-04-2025
18:36:02
2 CRA-2194-2025
execution of remaining sentence of imprisonment of the appellant may be
suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra , learned Counsel for respondent State opposes the application.
Contentions of the appellant have prima-facie substance, which deserves
consideration on merit. The appellant remained in judicial custody since
10/06/2023 to 19/06/2023 (9 days) and from 30/01/2025 to 17/02/2025 (18 days)
in total 27 days during trial and thereafter, from the date of impugned judgment
i.e. 17/02/2025, he is in jail. Thus, he has undergone the sentence of imprisonment
for 2 months and 12 days. During trial, the appellant was released on bail and he
has not misused the liberty granted to him. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the
parties, but without commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the
case, the application is allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of
remaining sentence of imprisonment of appellant shall remain suspended during
pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) 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
09/09/2025 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 his behalf, on the date notified for hearing.
3 CRA-2194-2025
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 his 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 his
attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court. The Trial Court shall
also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC/491 of BNSS against such appellant and
his surety without 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 IA stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
amol
