Madhya Pradesh High Court
Badde Burman Alias Gopaldas Burman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 January, 2025
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 CRA-7931-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7931 of 2021
(BADDE BURMAN ALIAS GOPALDAS BURMAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 31-01-2025
Shri Ghanshyam Pandey - Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Shweta Yadav - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra - Advocate for the complainant.
Heard on I.A. No.591 of 2023, which is second application under
Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant Badde Burman @
Gopaldas for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
His earlier application i.e. I.A.No.3414 of 2022 has been dismissed on
merits vide order dated 17/10/2022.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 363 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years with fine of
Rs.1000/-, Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years with
fine of Rs.1000/-, Section 367-D of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 20
years with fine of Rs.2000/- and Section 120 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo RI for 7 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulations.
The facts of the case are that on 26/06/2019 the father of the
prosecution (PW-2) has lodged a missing person report in Police Station
Kaimore that on 21/06/2019 her daughter aged about 16 years 11 months had
gone away. On the basis of information, FIR (Ex.P/7) Crime No.124/2019
under Section 363 of IPC has been registered against unknown person. On
2 CRA-7931-2021
17/08/2019 the prosecutrix has been recovered from Pune Railway Station,
Maharashtra and the statement of prosecutrix under Section 161 has been
recorded wherein she has stated that on 21/06/2019 when the prosecutrix has
went to answer the call of nature, at that time, appellant along with co-
accused came there and took the prosecutrix to Katni station. She further
stated that near the forest of Vijayraghavgarh, appellant Badde Burman
committed rape with her and thereafter she was kept in the house of Raju
Thakur at Pune, where Raju Thakur also committed rape with her. Co-
accused Raju Thakur kept the prosecutrix inside the locked house for about
two months. On the basis of statements of prosecutrix, Sections 366, 376-D
and 120-B of IPC has been added against the accused persons. After
investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely
been implicated in the case. Appellant is an innocent person. He is in custody
for a period of 758 days prior to judgment and thereafter he is in jail till
now. The final hearing of the appeal is not possible in near future. He is
ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and
conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the
application for suspension of sentence may be considered.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the
application by filing a written objection and prayed for rejection of the
application.
Learned counsel for the objector has no objection on suspension of
sentence and bail by filing I.A.No.22676 of 2023 and stated that she and her
3 CRA-7931-2021
parents have no objection, if the appellant be released on bail.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their
entirety, the fact that complainant has no objection if the appellant be
released on bail and final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future,
without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of prima facie
view that this is a case where sentence of appellant Badde Burman alias
Gopaldas Burman deserves to be suspended.
Consequently, I.A.No.591 of 2023 for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant is allowed.
It is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited, and furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, the
remaining part of the substantive jail sentence imposed upon appellant shall
remain suspended during the pendency of this case and he be released on
bail. The appellant shall appear before the concerned trial Court on
25.04.2025 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this regard
during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
mc
