Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ritesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 January, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1 CRA-12010-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 12010 of 2022
(RITESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 06-01-2025
Shri Satyam Agrawal - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Devendra Kumar Shukla - Panel Lawyer for the respondent
No.1/State.
None for the respondent No.2/victim despite service of notice.
Heard on I.A.No.8738 of 2024, second application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant, pending the appeal.
Appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under
Section 366 of IPC & Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with
fine of Rs.2,000/- & R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.3,000/- respectively
with default stipulations vide judgment dated 25.11.2022 passed in Special
Case No.133/2021 (State of M.P. vs. Ritesh ) by Ist Additional Sessions
Judge/Special Judge (POCSO, Act), Ashta, District Sehore (MP).
Appellant's first bail application (I.A. No.24104 of 2022) was
dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed vide order dated 24.01.2024.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has
been erroneously convicted by learned trial Court as it has not properly
appreciated the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material on record. It
2 CRA-12010-2022
is submitted that evidence of prosecution witnesses is full of omissions and
contradictions and such omissions and contradictions have not been
considered in right perspective by the learned trial Court. It is further
submitted that learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence
of minor prosecutrix who at the time of commission of offence was more
than 17 years & 8 months old. Learned counsel for the appellant has also
referred the cross-examination of the prosecutrix particularly paragraphs 4, 5,
6, 7 & 8 of her evidence and has submitted that prosecutrix was a consenting
party. At the time of commission of offence, prosecutrix was on the verge of
completion of age of 18 years. Appellant was also of the same age group. It
is further submitted that prosecutrix has nowhere stated that any rape was
committed upon her; on the contrary, she has deposed that she on her own
had gone with the appellant. Appellant has fair chances to succeed in appeal.
If the execution of jail sentence of appellant is not suspended, the purpose of
filing this appeal would become futile. Thus, it is prayed that custodial jail
sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and has submitted that prosecutrix
who was below 18 years of age, so her consent is immaterial and
inconsequential. Therefore, learned trial Court has not committed any error
in convicting the accused/appellant.
Having taken into consideration the evidence of prosecutrix (P.W.-2)
including medical evidence of Dr. Madhavi Rai (P.W.-3) & the evidence of
other witnesses and the fact that there is bleak possibility of hearing this
3 CRA-12010-2022
appeal in near future, I deem it a fit case to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of the appellant, pending the appeal. Consequently, I.A.No.8738 of
2024 is allowed.
It is directed that the execution of jail sentence of appellant - Ritesh is
hereby suspended subject to depositing the entire fine amount, if not already
deposited. It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his
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 trial Court on
07.04.2025 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in
this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
@shish
