Jitendra Shakya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 6562 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Jitendra Shakya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 May, 2025

                                                               1                                CRA-6718-2024
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT GWALIOR
                                                       CRA No. 6718 of 2024
                                            (JITENDRA SHAKYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )


                          Dated : 26-05-2025
                                Shri Hemant Singh Rana - Advocate for the appellant.

                                Shri Samar Ghuraiya - Government Advocate for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.11229/2024, first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant- Jitendra Shakya S/o Dayaram Shakya.

The appellant stands convicted under Sections 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- and Section 342 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 6 months imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that charges under the POCSO Act were also framed against the appellant but after trial it was found that victim is major and near about 20 years of age therefore, he has been implicated in the aforesaid charges. It is further submits that judgment has been passed ignoring serious infirmities in the prosecution case. He has already suffered 2 years 11 months' of incarceration out of 10 years. It is further submitted that 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 and grant of bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent/State opposed the prayer on the ground that prosecutrix has supported the prosecution case and even DNA /scientific evidence is also supported the prosecution case which is also against the appellant and, therefore, prays for

2 CRA-6718-2024 dismissal of the application. He, however, fairly submits that no criminal antecedents are reported against the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and the fact that appellant who is 27 years of age and has no criminal antecedents as well as the fact that he has already suffered 2 years and 11 months of incarceration out of 10 years and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak and period of incarceration, 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 26/06/2025 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

3 CRA-6718-2024 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. I.A.No.11229/2025 also stands disposed off List for final hearing in due course.

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) V. JUDGE

Ashish*