Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRA-12083-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 12083 of 2024
(MOHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 21-01-2025
Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Madhusudan Yadav GA for the State.
Heard on IA no. 17735/2024, an application filed under section 5 of
the Evidence Act for condonation of delay of 31 days in filing present
appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was
incarcerated and could not contact his family members and advocate,
therefore, present appeal could not be filed within time. The reasons for
delay is bonafide, therefore, the application be allowed and the delay be
condoned.
On due consideration, the IA is allowed and the delay is hereby
condoned.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on IA No. 17714 of 2024 , first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant seeking suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
The appellant- Mohan has been convicted for offences punishable
under Section 354-A(1)(ii) of IPC and sections 7 / 8 of POCSO Act and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 21-01-2025
19:42:15
2 CRA-12083-2024
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of
Rs.1,000/- and three years with fine of Rs. 1000/- with default stipulation,
vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 24/07/2024 passed by
Special Judge ( under POCSO Act ) Khategaon, District - Dewas (M.P.) in
ST no. 32/2023.
Learned Counsel for appellant submits that learned trial Court has
committed an error in convicting the appellant for the alleged offence. The
impugned judgment passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption,
conjecture and surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in
convicting and sentencing the present appellant without appreciating the
prosecution evidence properly. There are material contradictions and
omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Learned counsel further submits that
the appellant is 22 years at the time of alleged incident. He is an agriculturist
by profession. No criminal antecedent is reported against him. The appellant
has remained in judicial custody from 05/08/2023 to 24/07/2024 i.e. in total
for 353 days during trial. The appellant is undergoing the sentence of
imprisonment since the date of judgment i.e. 24/07/2024. Thus, he has
already undergone the sentence of imprisonment for more than 17 months in
total. During trial, the appellant was released on bail. He has not misused
the liberty granted to him. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in
near future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that execution of
remaining sentence of imprisonment of the appellant may be suspended and
he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposes the
3 CRA-12083-2024
application.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties, but without
commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, the
application is allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of remaining
sentence of imprisonment of appellant shall remain suspended during
pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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
21/04/2025 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 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 does not appear on the date of his appearance
before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown,
4 CRA-12083-2024
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 CrPC/491 of BNSS
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 IA stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
amol
