Aditya Aadiwal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2822 MP

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2822 MP
Judgement Date : 6 August, 2025

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Aditya Aadiwal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 August, 2025

                                                                1                                CRA-5428-2022
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRA No. 5428 of 2022
                                       (ADITYA AADIWAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )



                           Dated : 06-08-2025
                                 Shri R.K. Raghuvanshi - Advocate for the appellant.
                                 Shri Yash Soni - Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.2664/2023, first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C./Section 430(1) of BNSS, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant.

2 . This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 07.05.2022

passed by 18th Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), District Bhopal (M.P.) in Special Case No.10/2021, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction U/s. Imprisonment Fine In lieu of default 5(M)/6 of POCSO Act R.I. for 20 years Rs.6000/- Additional R.I. for 4 months 377 of IPC R.I. for 10 years RS.5000/- Additional R.I. for 3 months

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has wrongly convicted and sentenced the appellant. It is submitted that the trial Court did not appreciate the evidence properly, which were on record. Even

the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The age of the victim was also not proved. The victim (P.W.1) and his mother (P.W.2) have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution case. There are material omissions and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses also. As per MLC, there is no such observation of Doctor that any

2 CRA-5428-2022 act has been committed. It is further submitted that the appellant has already undergone more than 8 years of incarceration. This appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no possibility of early hearing of the appeal in near future. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed. 4 . Learned counsel for the State on the other hand has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and supported the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant, we

are of the opinion that the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant can be considered with a condition that he shall argue the matter finally on the next date of hearing.

7. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I.A. No.2664/2023 is allowed.

8 . It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended and he be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the Registry of this Court on 12.11.2025 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

3 CRA-5428-2022

9. List the matter for final hearing in due course.

(VIVEK KUMAR SINGH) (AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI) JUDGE JUDGE Shanu