[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 January, 2026
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 CRA-14214-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 14214 of 2024
(ARUN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 14-01-2026
Shri A.K. Saraswat - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Bhaskar Agrawal - Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.
Shri Vijay Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent/Objector.
Heard on I.A.No.3208/2025, which is second application under
Section 430(1) 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 filed on behalf of the appellant (Arun).
The appellant has been convicted by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act,
District Mandsaur by judgment dated 6.11.2024 passed in SC ATR/192/2021
for commission of offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default clause.
As per the prosecution story, on 07/11/21, the prosecutrix lodged a
complaint to Police Station - A.J.K. Mandsaur, to the effect that in the month
of February, 2021 she had come from Jhabua to Mandasaur with her brother
and sister-in-law for labour work. There she got acquainted with co-accused
appellant Balmukund and she used to talk to him on the phone. On
25/08/2021 co-accused Balmukund committed rape on her in a hut, near
Pashupatinath gate on false pretext of marriage and thereafter again
committed rape on her two three times but did not marry her and left her.
2 CRA-14214-2024
Then she met with present appellant Arun who also committed rape on her
on false pretext of marriage. Then, the prosecutrix narrated entire story to her
parents and then lodged the present crime against the appellant and the co
accused person. After completing the investigation the charge sheet was filed
and the trial Court framed the charges against the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecutrix was a
major lady and her allegation is that on the ground of promise of marriage,
she was exploited by the appellant and the co-accused is absolutely false.
There is a delay of 8 months in lodging the FIR.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and
submits that the prosecutrix has supported the prosecution case and as per the
DNA report, the co-accused Balmukund is a biological father.
Learned counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the complainant
argued that the matter has been settled at their level best. The prosecutrix has
already been married. The child has been adopted by father of the
prosecutrix. The appellant has served jail sentence for more than one year
and 5 months and no purpose will be served continuing the appellant in
custody. On these grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays that
execution of remaining sentence of imprisonment of the appellant may be
suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant argued that he has no objection to
grant suspension of jails sentence to the appellant.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and also considering
the fact that the appellant has already undergone actual jail sentence of
3 CRA-14214-2024
almost one year and 3 months, the appeal is of the year 2024, the final
hearing of the appeal may take time therefore, without commenting on the
merit of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is
entitled for grant of suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, I.A.No.3208/2025 is allowed and it is directed that the
execution of remaining jail sentence against the appellant (Arun S/o. Dilip
Lohar) shall remain suspended and he be released on bail upon his
depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited) and upon furnishing
bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 27.04.2026 and on subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf
by the Registry.
With the aforesaid, I.A is allowed and disposed of.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (ALOK AWASTHI)
JUDGE JUDGE
SS/-
