Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhaniya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2025
1 CRA-3779-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 3779 of 2024
(BHANIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 21-01-2025
Ms.Sneha Kaushalya - Advocate for appellant.
Mr. Anand Bhatt - Govt. Advocate for the respondent / State.
Heard on I.A.No.16995/2024, second application under Section 430 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of
the appellant Bhaniya S/o Rama Waskley . His earlier application vide
I.A.No.4860/2024 was dismissed as withdrawn on 09/07/2024.
The appellant stands convicted under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code,
1860 and Section 7 r/w 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and sentenced to undergo 03 years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- and 03 years RI
with fine of Rs.1,000/- respectively with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this impugned
judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this matter. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective.
There are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses.
Impugned judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures and has been passed
ignoring serious anomalies. It is further submitted that present appellant has so far
suffered jail incarceration of near about 01 year and 02 months out of 03 years jail
sentence awarded to him. The appeal being of the year 2024 is not likely to be
heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant.
Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence
2 CRA-3779-2024
and grant of bail.
Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail,
regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved against the
present appellant. He further submits that appellant is the uncle of the victim of
near about 15 years of age, who has scandalized relations by his misbehaviour.
Hence, he is not entitle for benefit of suspension of sentence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and circumstances
of the case, looking to the period of custody coupled with the fact that possibility
of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak, without expressing any
conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a fit case to suspend the remaining
custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount, if
not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of the
appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant be released on bail on
his furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned 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 04/03/2025 and on
such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(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
3 CRA-3779-2024
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 do 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 Cr.P.C. / Section
491 of BNSS, 2023 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 appellant shall be
forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the
Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Tej
