Chitransh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 4060 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Chitransh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 February, 2025

Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

                                                              1                                   CRA-946-2024
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT INDORE
                                                       CRA No. 946 of 2024
                                         (CHITRANSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )



                           Dated : 05-02-2025
                                 Shri Vivek Singh - Senior counsel with Shri Pranay Joshi - Advocate
                           for the appellant.
                                 Shri H. S. Rathore - Government Advocate for the respondents State.

Shri Mohammed Imran Khan - Advocate for the complainant. Shri Mohammad Aslam Khan- Advocate for the complainant.

Per :- Justice Gajendra Singh Heard on IA No. 15593 of 2024 , which is an application for urgent hearing.

The same is allowed and disposed of.

Heard on I.A. No.6796/2024 which is the first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant/accused for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 376 (3) of IPC and Section 4 read with section 2 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence

Act, 2012 (in short '' POCSO Act, 2012" ) and sentenced for 20 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 10,000/- fine with default stipulations and under Section 4 (2) of the POCSO Act, 2012 by Special Judge POCSO Act, 2012/Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur vide judgment dated 12.12.2023.

The appellant has been convicted for penetrative sexual assault with

2 CRA-946-2024 child of 15 years, 10 months and 20 days old on 18.08.2022.

This application has been preferred on the ground that the age of the prosecutrix has been assessed without considering the cross examination of (PW-5) father and (PW-2) mother. The cross examination of (PW-3) Teacher has been ignored. DNA report is negative and prosecution story has been improved in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC.

Counsel representing the victim has opposed the application by filing the IA No. 7087 of 2024. Government Advocate for the State also opposed the application by filing the reply through Document No. 5437 of 2024.

Perused the record.

Trial Court estimated the age of the victim as minor on the basis of Exhibit-P-4, P-5, P-9, P-10, P-11 and P-17. Exhibit-P-4 is High School

Certificate Examination, 2022 issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal and Exhibit-P-5 is the Birth Certificate in which birth was registered on 13.10.2006.

Considering the statement of victim (PW-1) specially Paragraph-6, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence, at present.

Hence, I.A. No.679/2024 is rejected.

Certified copy as per rules.

                           (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI)                          (GAJENDRA SINGH)
                                     JUDGE                                              JUDGE
                           rashmi