Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2025
1 CRA-4131-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 4131 of 2025
(RAVI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 01-05-2025
Shri Neeraj Siresiya, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the trial Court be requisitioned.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.5623/2025, first 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 No.1 Ravi S/o Vinod Prajapat and appellant No.2
Shyamubai W/o Prakash Bagri.
The appellant No.1 Ravi stands convicted under Section 354 of IPC,
7/8 of POCSO Act, 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, Section 3(1)(W)(I) of
SC/ST (POA) Act and sentenced to undergo 3 years RI with fine of
Rs.1000/-, 3 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, 3 years RI with fine of
Rs.1000/- and 3 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- respectively with usual
default stipulation.
The appellant No.2 Shyamu Bai stands convicted under Section 16/17
of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo 3 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-
with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOUMYA
RANJAN DALAI
Signing time: 02-05-2025
11:39:45
2 CRA-4131-2025
impugned judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this matter. This is a case where three years sentence
has been imposed on the appellant. Jail sentence has already been suspended
by the trial Court which is effective till 08.05.2025. 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 infirmities and anomalies. The appeal being of the year 2025
is not likely to be heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour
of the appellants. Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for
suspension of jail sentence 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 appellants.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case 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 appellants.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount,
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of
3 CRA-4131-2025
the appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellants be released
on bail on their furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) each with separate solvent surety in the like amount to
the satisfaction of learned trial Court for compliance with following
conditions:-
(1) The appellants shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellants shall appear before the Trial Court on 18.06.2025 and
on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3) The appellants 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 appellants 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 appellants 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 appellants and his surety without
any reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting
4 CRA-4131-2025
bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
On arrest / surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellants
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.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
soumya
