[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vikas @ Vishwajeet Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 January, 2026
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 CRA-4106-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 4106 of 2024
(VIKAS @ VISHWAJEET SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 20-01-2026
Shri Rishabh Upadhyay - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Bhaskar Agrawal - Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.
Shri Harshal Khalane, learned counsel for the Complainant.
Heard on I.A.No.9527/2025, which is an application under Section
430 of BNSS for grant of suspension of jail sentence filed on behalf
of appellant Vikas @ Vishwajeet Singh S/o. Ajeet Singh.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 366
of IPC, sentenced to undergo 3 years RI with fine of Rs.500/- and 5 LR/w6
of POCSO, sentenced to undergo 20 years R.I. with fine of Rs.500/- with
fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation on each count.
The prosecution case is that the appellant has abducted the minor girl
and exploited her physically.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that as per the statement
of the prosecutrix, she herself had gone with the appellant and stayed for
about 4 months. Thus she was a consenting party. However, the appellant has
been convicted on the ground that the prosecutrix has been found to be
minor on the date of incident aged 14 years 5 months as per the date of birth
recorded in the scholar register. He argued that the source of recording the
date of age of the prosecutrix in the scholar register has not been disclosed
by the prosecution witnesses. He referred the statement of (PW.2), mother of
2 CRA-4106-2024
the prosecutrix and (PW.11) Hemant Vyas in this regard and also relied on
the judgment passed by the Division Bench in the case of in the case of
Tejubai Vs. State of MP , 2025(1) MPLJ Cr.75 . He submits that the appeal
being of the year 2024 may take time for final hearing. On such grounds, it is
prayed that jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he be
released on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as the complainant
opposed the prayer and submitted that the prosecution has proved that on the
date of the offence, the prosecutrix was a minor and the FSL report (Exhibit
P/17) is positive and, therefore, the application for grant of suspension is
liable to be dismissed, even if she is a consenting party.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the testimony of the prosecutrix that she herself had gone along
with the appellant and stayed for about 4 months with him and further the
fact that the prosecution has not proved the source of recording of the age of
the prosecutrix in the scholar register and the fact that in the case of Tejubai
v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 (1) MPLJ (Crl.) 75 it was
held that if the date of birth of the prosecutrix in the school register is
recorded on the basis of a person who made entry of the date of birth, the
same is not sufficient to prove the age. Apart from that, it is true that the age
of appellant is also 24 years on the date of incident and he is in jail for last 5
years. Accordingly, I.A. No.9527/2025 stands allowed.
It is directed that the execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant
- Vikas @ Vishwajeet Singh shall remain suspended during the pendency of
3 CRA-4106-2024
the appeal and he be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial and on depositing the fine
amount (if not already deposited) with a further direction to remain present
before the Registry of this Court 10.03.2026 and all subsequent dates as may
be fixed by the Registry in this regard during the pendency of the appeal.
With the aforesaid, I.A. No.9527/2025, stands disposed of.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (ALOK AWASTHI)
JUDGE JUDGE
SS/-
