Madhya Pradesh High Court
Annu @ Chandrapal Singh Gond vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 November, 2021
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 CRA-1578-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 1578 of 2021
(ANNU @ CHANDRAPAL SINGH GOND Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 23-11-2021
Shri A.S. Parihar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Lokesh Jain, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.
Record of the trial Court is available.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal is admitted for final hearing Also heard on I.A. No.15791/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant-Annu @ Chandrapal Singh Gond.
The appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 b y the appellant/accused against judgment dated 21.01.2021 passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge Nagod, District-Satna (MP ) in Special Case No.3400134/2017, by which the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 376(2)(<+) of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and Section 506-II of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Default stipulations have also been imposed by the trial Court.
Prosecution case, in short, is that on 27.09.2017, prosecutrix aged 17 years, lodged the report against the appellant/accused. It is alleged by her that appellant/accused committed intercourse with her. Thereafter, she became pregnant, then she disclosed all the incident to her parents and lodged the report.
Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submits that learned trial Court committed grave error to convict and sentence the appellant/accused. Learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in perspective way. The age of prosecutrix is not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Jainendra Singh Signature Not Verified SAN (PW-10) is a Principal of Primary School Parsamriya. He admitted this fact Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.11.23 17:33:56 IST 2 CRA-1578-2021 that he has no knowledge what is the source of information regarding date of birth of prosecutrix. PW-2 is the father of prosecutrix. He did not depose the date of birth of prosecutrix. Prosecurix was examined by the Doctor and found that her secondary sexual character is found well developed. So, the age of prosecutrix may be above 18 years. The mother of prosecutrix has been examined as DW-1. She deposed before the trial Court that she is ready to solemnize marriage of prosecutrix with appellant/accused. Actually, prosecutrix and appellant/accused love each other. They want to solemnize marriage with each other but at that time their parents were not ready. Due to this prosecutrix lodged the FIR. Prosecutrix did not disclose the incident for 6 months to anyone. There is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. Apart from this, there are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Appellant/accused has served almost 4 years sentence out of 10 years jail sentence. This appeal is of the year 2021. There are fair chances to succeed in the appeal. Final hearing of this appeal will take time. Therefore, the application filed on behalf of the appellant may be allowed and the period of his remaining jail sentence may be suspended further and he may be released on bail.
Learned P.L. for the respondent/State has opposed the application. Hearing argument of both the parties and this fact that the age of prosecutrix is disputed, the mother of prosecutrix has been examined as DW- 1, both parties are ready to solemnize marriage, appellant/accused has served almost 4 years sentence out of 10 years jail sentence, this appeal is of the year 2021, final hearing of this appeal will take time, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate to suspend the execution of jail sentence awarded to the appellant and grant bail to him.
Consequently, I.A. No.15791/2021 is allowed subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited. The custodial sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal.
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.11.23 17:33:56 IST3 CRA-1578-2021 Appellant-Annu @ Chandrapal Singh Gond be released from custody subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant shall appear and mark his presence before the trial Court on 21.02.2022 and shall continue to do so on all such future dates, as may be given by the trial Court in this behalf, during pendency of the matter.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE L.R. Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2021.11.23 17:33:56 IST