Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prakash vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 April, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRA-12784-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 12784 of 2024
(PRAKASH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 22-04-2025
Shri Neeraj Siresiya, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Amit Raval, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Appeal being arguable, admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.18497/2024, first application under Section 389 of
Cr.P.C./Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagraik Suraksha Sanhita moved on behalf of
appellant-Prakash seeking suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo 03 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.11.2024,
passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act)
Indore(M.P.) in Special SC No.59/2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits 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 the
appellant on the basis of the statement of victim and her sister ignoring the
inherent inconsistencies and improbabilities in their evidence specially the cross-
examination. Other witness did not support the prosecution. No offence, as
2 CRA-12784-2024
alleged, was proved against the appellant. There is no likelihood of hearing of
appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that 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 suspension
application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence and prays for its rejection.
The contentions of appellant has prima facie substance which deserve
consideration on merit. The appellant remained in judicial custody for 12 days. He
was released on bail and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. His sentence
for imprisonment was suspended by the trial Court under Section 389(3) of
Cr.P.C. The hearing of the appeal would take considerable time.
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 jail sentence of appellant - Prakash 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 23.06.2025, and on
such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
3 CRA-12784-2024
(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.
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 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 appellants shall be
forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the
Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, IA No.18497/2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
4 CRA-12784-2024
pn
