Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kalu @ Dileep Pal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1 CRA-3879-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 3879 of 2025
(KALU @ DILEEP PAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 18-08-2025
Shri Arun Pateria and Shri Abhishek Tiwari - Advocates for the
appellant.
Shri B.P.S.Chauhan - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.13517/2025, an application under Section 430 (1) of
BNSS, 2023 on behalf of sole appellant - Kalu @ Dileep Pal for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
2. This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 11.02.2025 passed
by Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, District Gwalior (M.P.) in ST
No.303/2021; whereby, present appellant has been convicted and sentenced
as under :-
Section Imprisonment Fine Default in lieu
376 (gha) of IPC Life Imprisonment 50,000/- 06 months RI
376 (2)(m) of IPC 10 years R.I. 5,000/- 01 month RI
307/34 of IPC 10 years R.I. 5,000/- 01 month RI
3 . It is the submission of counsel for present appellant that the trial
Court erred in convicting and awarding jail sentence to appellant. Present
appellant has suffered two years and three months of incarceration as pre and
post trial confinement. It is further submitted that prosecutrix in her
statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. held vide Ex.P/6 did not mention the
role of the present appellant as perpetrator. She refers name of only one
accused Raju @ Bharat. After some time, another statement under Section
2 CRA-3879-2025
164 of Cr.P.C. (vide Ex.P/7) was taken, in which she reiterated the same
version and did not refer the role of present appellant in any manner. Even in
Test Identification Parade conducted vide Ex.P/8 she did not identify the
present appellant. Even her husband and her son also went the same way. All
witnesses identified co-accused Raju @ Bharat.
4 . Learned counsel for the appellant further refers the testimony of
prosecutrix (P.W.1) and refers para 27 of her cross examination, in which she
made specific statement that on fateful day only one person committed rape
over her and that person is not present appellant Kalu @ Dileep Pal. The
final hearing of the appeal shall take some time and he has a good case on
merits. He undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this
Court. It is further submitted that looking to the nature of evidence surfaced
and period of custody suffered, present appellant be granted benefit of
suspension.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the
prayer and prayed for rejection of application.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and record perused.
7. Considering the submissions advanced, but without commenting on
the merits of the case, I.A.No.13517/2025 filed on behalf of sole appellant -
Kalu @ Dileep Pal stands allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of
present appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of the present
appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to verification of the factum
of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing personal bond in the sum
of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive Thousand Only) with one solvent surety
3 CRA-3879-2025
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned. The
appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on
26.11.2025 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
8. Present appellant shall not be source of embarrassment and
harassment to the complainant/victim side in any manner and he shall not
move in their vicinity; otherwise, benefit of bail given today by way of
suspension of sentence shall be withdrawn immediately.
9. Present appellant shall mark his presence before concerned Police
Station on first Sunday of every alternate month between 10:30 am to 2:00
pm starting from September 2025 for the next two years i.e. till August,
2027.
10. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
11. Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding
the instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
12. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
information and necessary compliance.
(ANAND PATHAK) (PUSHPENDRA YADAV)
JUDGE JUDGE
SP
