Madhya Pradesh High Court
Awadhesh Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 June, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-1667-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1667 of 2024
(AWADHESH SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 27-06-2025
Shri Ram Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.494/2025, an application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant-
Awadhesh Singh.
This appeal is filed being aggrieved of judgment dated 12/12/2023
passed in ST No.267/2021 by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Shahdol,
whereby appellant has been convicted in the following manners:-
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
in lieu of fine
R.I. for five R.I for three
450 I.P.C. Rs.1,000/-
years months
5(m) read with Life R.I. for six
POCSO Rs.1,000/-
Section 6 Imprisonment months
It is submitted that appellant is innocent. FIR (Ex.P/16) was lodged
naming the appellant as an accused whereas in her statement recorded under
Section 161 of Cr.P.C. (Ex.D/1), prosecutrix had admitted that at the time of
incident, she was not knowing the name of the person and when she raised an
2 CRA-1667-2024
alarm, appellant had ran away. When her father's elder brother came, then
she had narrated the story to him and, in turn, he called her father who, on
his return, had dial 100 number and called Police, thereafter FIR was lodged.
It is pointed out that prosecutrix, in para-7 of her cross-examination,
has admitted that name of the appellant was given by the elder brother of her
father. In para-5 of her cross-examination, she has admitted that her father
had an altercation with the appellant when he asked for his money for the
electrical work carried out by him.
It is also pointed out that Dr. Mamta Jagatpal (PW-2) has stated that
there was redness in the labia minora but hymen was intact. She has
categorically stated that there was no sign of penetration present. Thereafter
reading from her cross-examination, it is pointed out that it is not a case of
any penetrative sexual assault. It is submitted that appellant is innocent and
in the alternative, at the best, it is not a case of penetrative sexual assault.
Appellant is in custody. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the jail sentence
of the appellant and grant him bail.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor, opposes the prayer for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail and submits that as per the FSL
report (Ex.P/35), human sperms were found on Article 'C' and 'D''. It is also
submitted by learned Public Prosecutor that in 161 statement, prosecutrix has
taken name, but admits that in para-7 she has admitted that name of accused
was given to her by elder brother of her father. Prosecutrix has also admitted
that appellant had carried out electric work in her house, therefore, no further
3 CRA-1667-2024
indulgence is called for.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Article 'C' is the semen slide of the appellant and Article 'D' is the
underwear of the appellant and there is no DNA report, therefore, in our
opinion, presence of sperms on Article 'C' and 'D' is not sufficient to prima
facie connect the appellant, therefore, without commenting on merits of the
case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to suspend the remaining
part of the jail sentence of appellant and release him on bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.494/2025 is allowed.
It is directed that on depositing of fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court
on 04/09/2025 and on all subsequent dates as may be fixed by the concerned
Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence of appellant shall
remain suspended and he be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
4 CRA-1667-2024
